READINGS ON PARTIES AND ELECTIONS 
IN THE UNITED STATES 



THE MACMILLAN COMPANY 

NEW YORK • BOSTON ■ CHICAGO 
SAN FRANCISCO 

MACMILLAN & CO., Limited 

LONDON • BOMBAY ■ CALCUTTA 
MELBOURNE 

THE MACMILLAN CO. OF CANADA, Ltd. 

TORONTO 



READINGS ON 

PARTIES AND ELECTIONS 
IN THE UNITED STATES 



BY 



CHESTER LLOYD JONES 

if 

ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR OF POLITICAL SCIENCE 
IN THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN 



THE MACMILLAN COMPANY 
1912 

All rights reserved 






4/is 

^ ^ 



Copyright, 1912, 
By THE MACMILLAN COMPANY. 



Set up and electrotyped. Published January, 1912. 



Norfoaoti $wbb 

J. S. Cushing Co. — Berwick & Smith Co. 

Norwood, Mass., U.S.A. 

©CI.A303797 



S» 



Co 
CAROLINE LLOYD JONES 



PREFACE 

As our civilization grows more complex and our population 
greater, the organization and working of party government be- 
COmes something in which the citizen feels an increasing inter- 
est. Whether we welcome the change or not, the state plays 
a growing part in our everyday lives; our food is standardized, 
the charge for moving of goods or persons from place to place 
is regulated, many businesses formerly considered private are 
subjected to control because of the peculiar relation in which 
they stand to the public. The house of the citizen is no longer 
his castle within which the state may not prescribe the manner 
of life, and a large part of our population is no longer "free" 
to work where it will and for as long as it may please. 

When such a change in the sphere of the state is coming over 
our national life, it becomes important, as never before, that the 
people who are subject to regulation should exercise control 
over those who set the laws. Party is the means by which 
public policy is determined. To have efficient control we must 
have parties responsive to the popular will, parties whose actions 
turn on public policy, not on the will of agents whom the public 
cannot control. Government of the people is government by 
party in all modern states. Clean government and normal 
party action are possible in a democracy only when those who 
are governed understand how they are governed. 

It is to make easy of access some of the best discussions 
illustrative of the development, present organization, abuses 
and remedies for the defects of our party government that this 
book is published. It is not a source book ; indeed, the chief 
reliance has been upon secondary and contemporaneous writing, 
but it is believed that the material will, for this reason, have 



viii Preface 

added interest because it deals with the living, growing forces 

of the present time. 

I am indebted for assistance in securing the material for this 

book to Dr. Charles McCarthy of the Wisconsin Legislative 

Reference Library, who has placed the invaluable collection of 

material made under his direction at my disposal. My thanks 

are due to the authors and publishers of the selections for their 

permission to reproduce them. Mr. Leo Tiefenthaler, sometime 

assistant in political science in the University of Wisconsin, 

has been a willing collaborator who has aided much by criticism 

and suggestion. 

CHESTER LLOYD JONES. 
Madison, Wisconsin, 
November, 191 1. 



CONTENTS 



I. PARTY CONTROL OF THE GOVERNMENT 



Party Government in England and the United States Contrasted 
Goodnow, F. J., Politics and Administration. Macmillan, New 

York, 1900; p. 148 et seq. 

The Conditions of Party Government in the United States 

Smith, J. A., The Spirit of the American Government. Macmil 
Ian, New York, 1907 ; p. 203 et seq. (excerpt) . 
The Necessity of Strong Parties in the United States 

Wilson, W., Constitutional Government in the United States 
Columbia University Press, New York, 1908 ; p. 204 et seq. 



II. THE DEVELOPMENT OF PARTY ORGANIZATION 
IN THE UNITED STATES 

The Early Fear of Party Influence 

(a) Madison, J., In the Federalist, No. X, 1787 .... 28 

(b) Washington, G., Farewell Address. Waitings of Washing- 

ton, Evans, L. B., ed. Putnams, New York, 1908 ; 

p. 531 et seq. (excerpt) 33 

Early Mention of Caucuses and their Importance 

Adams, John, The Works of John Adams, edited by C. F. Adams. 
Little and Brown, Boston, 1850 ; Vol. II, p. 144 37 

The Congressional Caucus 

Ostrogorski, M., Democracy and the Organization of Political 

Parties. Macmillan, New York, 1902 ; Vol. II, pp. 13-19 . 38 
How the Congressional Nominating Caucus Worked 

Niles, Weekly Register, I, 3d ser., p. 388 et seq 44 

The Transition from the Congressional Caucus to the Nominating 
Convention 
Dallinger, F. W., Nominations for Elective Office. Longmans, 
New York, 1903 ; pp. 29-34 46 



x Contents 

III. THE CONVENTION AND THE DIRECT PRIMARY 

PAGE 

1. The Strength of the Convention System 

Meyer, E. C, Nominating Systems. Madison, Wisconsin, 1902; 

PP. 48-54 53 

2. The Corrupt Convention 

La Follette, R. M., Primary Elections. Address delivered before 
Michigan University, Ann Arbor, Michigan, March 12, 1898 . 57 

3. Weaknesses of the Convention System 

Meyer, E. C, Nominating Systems. Madison, Wisconsin, 1902; 

V'S1 etse 9 6 3 

4. Non-Partisan Municipal Primary Elections 

Laws of Iowa, Chap. 48, 1907 (excerpt) 67 

5. Legislation Needed to Supplement Primary Election Laws 

Merriam, C. E., Primary Elections. University of Chicago Press ; 
pp. 163-176 71 

IV. THE NATIONAL CONVENTION AND THE ELECTION 
OF THE PRESIDENT 

1. The Composition of the National Convention 

Woodburn, J. A., Political Parties and Party Problems in the 
United States. Putnams, New York, 1906; pp. 152-162 . 80 

2. The Call of a National Convention 

Official Call, by the Republican Committee, 1908 ... 86 

3. The Work of the National Convention 

Woodburn, J. A., Political Parties and Party Problems in the 
United States. Putnams, New York, 1906; pp. 176-196 . 89 

4. A Favorite Son Boom 

Milwaukee Sentinel, June 17, 1908 99 

5. Convention Enthusiasm 

Milwaukee Free Press, June 19, 1908 ioi 

6. Convention Oratory 

Cochems, H. F., Speech nominating Robert M. La Follette for 
President, 1908 . 103 

7. The Election of the President of the United States 

Fuller, R. H., Government by the People. Macmillan, 1908; 

pp. 120-134 106 

8. The Electoral College 

Gauss, H. C, The American Government. Hammersly, L. R. & 
Co., New York, 1908 ; pp. 19-22 115 



Contents xi 



9. The Electoral College, its Defects 

Dougherty, J. H., The Electoral System of the United States. 
G. P. Putnam's Sons, New York; pp. 281-324 . . .118 



V. SENATORIAL ELECTIONS 

Constitutional and Legal Provisions concerning the Election of 
United States Senators 

(a) United States Constitution 125 

(b) United States Statutes 126 

(c) A State Law on the Election of United States SenatorsXPa.) 127 
A Corrupt Senatorial Election 

Connolly, C. P., The Story of Montana. McClure's, Nov., 1906; 

Vol. 28, No. 1, pp. 41-43 and p. 27 129 

Why we Should Have Popular Election of Senators 

Haynes, G. H., The Election of Senators. Henry Holt & Co., 

New York, 1906 ; p. 2^9 et seq 136 

The Oregon Method of Electing United States Senators 

Bourne, Jr., J., Popular Government in Oregon. Outlook, Vol. 96, 
No. 6, Oct. 8, 1910; p. $2\etseq 141 



VI. ELECTIONS TO THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 
AND TO THE STATE LEGISLATURE 

1. The Abuse of Apportionments and Single Member Districts 

Commons, J. R., Proportional Representation. Macmillan, New 
York, 1907 ; p. 48 et seq. and 80 et seq 147 

2. Gerrymander of State Legislative Districts 

Revised Record of the Constitutional Convention of New York, 
1894; Vol. Ill, pp. 1083, 1162; Vol. IV, p. 34 et seq. . . 151 

3. The Federal Law Requiring Single Member Districts for the Election 

of Members of the House of Representatives 
United States Statutes at Large. Vol. V, p. 491 ; June 25, 1842 156 

4. Constitutional Limitations on Apportionments 

Reinsch, P. S., American Legislatures and Legislative Methods. 
Century Co., New York, 1907 ; pp. 204-213 .... 157 

5. Some Types of Proportional Representation 

Robert Tyson. Equity, Jan., 191 1 164 



xii Contents 



VII. PARTY ORGANIZATION 

PAGE 

1. Party Regularity 

Ford, H. J., Rise and Growth of American Politics. Macmillan, 
New York, 1900 ; pp. 325-333 . . . . . .169 

2. What the Party Machine has to Do 

Bryce, J., The American Commonwealth. Macmillan, New York, 
1910; Vol. II, pp. 93-100 175 

3. How the Party is Organized 

Jenks, J. W., Money in Practical Politics. Century, Vol. 44, 
1892; p. 941 178 

4. A Day with a Local Politician 

Evening Post (New York), Dec. 14, 1907 179 

5. Political Clubs 

Ostrogorski, M., Democracy and the Party System. Macmillan, 
New York, 19 10 ; pp. 166-170 181 

6. The Contrast of Country and City Electorates 

Bryce, J., The American Commonwealth. Macmillan, New York, 
1910 ; Vol. II, pp. 101-104 184 

7. State Central Committees 

Merriam, C. E., Political Science Quarterly, 1904; pp. 224-233 . 188 

8. The Party Machine in Pennsylvania 

Wanamaker, John, Speeches on Quayism and Boss Domination 
in Pennsylvania Politics. Published by the Business Men's 
Republican League of the State of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia. 
Undated (1898?) ; pp. 231-235 . . . . . 193 

9. Rules of the Republican Party in Pennsylvania 

Adopted in State Convention held at Harrisburg, Aug. 24, 1899 197 
10. The Powers of the National Committee 

Ogden, Rollo, New Powers of the National Committee. Atlantic 

Monthly, Vol. 89, 1902 ; ^.*](>etseq 199 

^/II. The President as a Party Leader 

Wilson, W., Constitutional Government in the United States. 
Columbia University Press, New York, 1908 ; Chap. Ill (ex- 
cerpts) . . . . . . V . . . . 205 



VIII. THE BALLOT 

1. The Australian Ballot 

Shaw, W. B., Good Ballot Laws and Bad. Outlook, Dec. 9, 1905 ; 
pp. 864-867 . .212 



Contents xiii 



2. Forms of Ballot 

Allen, Philip L., Ballot Laws and their Workings. Political Sci- 
ence Quarterly, Vol. XXI, No. I, 1906 214 

3. The Advantages of the Massachusetts Ballot 

Dana, Richard Henry, The Form of Ballot. City Club Bulletin, 
City Club of Philadelphia, April 21, 19 10 . . . . 220 

4. The Federal Act Requiring Written or Printed Ballots for the Elec- 

tion of Members of the House of Representatives 
United States Statutes at Large, Vol. 17, p. 61, May 3, 1872 

5. Ballot Reform, Need of Simplification 

Childs, R. S., Proceedings of the American Political Science Asso- 
ciation, Vol. VI, 1909 ; pp. 65-70 

6. Women and the Suffrage 

Howe, Julia Ward. The Case for Woman Suffrage. Outlook, 
April 3, 1909 ; pp. 780-784 

7. An Argument against Woman Suffrage 

M'Intire, Mary A. J., Of What Benefit to Women. Pamphlet 
printed by the Massachusetts Association opposed to Exten- 
sion of Woman Suffrage (excerpt) 

8. The Negro's Right to Vote ; its Denial 

Rose, J. C, Negro Suffrage. American Political Science Review, 
Vol. I, p. 17 et seq 



IX. PARTY PROBLEMS AND REMEDIES 



224 



225 



232 



236 



244 



Party Influence in Federal Appointments 

Bryce, J., The American Commonwealth. Macmillan, New York, 

1910; Vol. I, pp. 61-65 2 5 l 

Machine Politics in the Lincoln Administration 

Stickney, A., Organized Democracy. Houghton, New York, 

1906; p. 188 et seq 256 

Limiting Partisan Activity of Officeholders 

United States Civil Service Commission, July, 1910 . . . 260 
The Present Federal Civil Service and its Need of Further Reform 
Eliot, C. W., Annual Address as President of the National Civil 
Service Reform League. Good Government, New York, Jan., 

1911 267 

Legal Repression of Political Corruption 

McGovern, F. E., Proceedings of the American Political Science 

Association 1907 ; pp. 266-276 274 

Violence at Elections 

Public Ledger (Philadelphia), Nov. 3, 1909 .... 282 



xiv Contents 



PAGE 



7. Defeating the Australian Ballot by the " Assisted " Vote 

Kennan, G., Outlook, Feb. 22, 1903 ; p. 432 et seq. . . . 285 

8. Repeating 

Finch, E. R., The Fight for a Clean Ballot. Independent, May 
12, 1910 288 

9. The Effect of Vote Buying on the Voters 

Jenks, J. W., Money in Practical Politics. Century, Vol. 44, 

1892; p. 947 296 

10. The Power of the United States to Regulate Elections to the House 

of Representatives 
Ex parte Siebold, 100 U. S. 371, 1879 (excerpt) .... 298 

11. Publicity of Campaign Contributions 

Brooks, R. C, Corruption in American Politics and Life. Dodd, 
Mead and Co., New York, 19 10; pp. 229-237 . . . 302 

12. The Campaign War Chest 

Carr, J. F., Campaign Funds and Campaign Scandals. Outlook, 
Nov. 4, 1905 306 

13. Campaign Expenditures and Publicity 

Bourne, Jr., J., Speech in United States Senate. Thurs., May 5, 

1910 ; p. 13 (pam.) 314 

14. The Corrupt Practice Laws of Maryland 

Lowrie, S. G., Corrupt Practices at Elections, Madison, Wiscon- 
sin, 191 1.. Wisconsin Legislative Reference Library, pp. 38- 

40 319 

15. The Chicago Municipal Voters' League 

(a) Its Organization : The Municipal Voters' League, What It 

Really Is (pam.) - . . . 321 

(£) Its Platform. Chicago Record-Herald, Mar. 29, 191 1 (ex- 
cerpt) . . . . 324 

(c) Its Estimate of Candidates. Extract from Report in Chicago 

Record-Herald, Mar. 24, 191 1 325 

16. National Parties in Local Elections 

Lowell, F. C, The American Boss. Atlantic Monthly, 1900; 
pp. 292-293 327 

17. Municipal Politics and Bossism 

Deming, H. E., Government of American Cities. G. P. Putnam's 
Sons, New York, 1 9 10; pp. 192-197 330 

X. DIRECT LEGISLATION AND THE RECALL 

1. The Initiative and Referendum 

Constitution of Oregon, Articles IV and XVII .... 335 



Contents xv 



2. The Weakness of Direct Legislation 

Sanborn, J. B., Popular Legislation in the United States. Politi- 
cal Science Quarterly, Vol. 23, Dec, 1908 ; p. 587 et seq. . 338 

3. Objections to Direct Legislation Examined 

Lobinger, C. S. Arena, Vol. 34, 1905 ; pp. 234-240 . . . 345 

4. The Recall in Oregon 

Bourne, Jr., J., Popular Government in Oregon. Outlook, Vol. 
96, No. 6, Oct. 8, 1910; p. 329 351 

5. The Recall in Arizona 

Constitution of Arizona, Art. VIII, 1 9 10 352 



L 



READINGS ON PARTIES AND ELECTIONS 

I. Party Control of the Government 

I. PARTY GOVERNMENT IN ENGLAND AND THE UNITED STATES 
CONTRASTED l 

The basis of the democratic thought of the nineteenth cen- 
tury is the expression of the popular will in government. The 
means adopted to accomplish the result is the political party. 
In England it expresses the popular will from within the govern- 
ment; in the United States it imposes its control from without. 

Popular government has unquestionably been the political 
ideal of the nineteenth century. Its realization has been the 
end of most of the changes which have been made during the 
century in the political institutions of nations enjoying western 
European civilization. This is seen in the steadily increasing 
participation of the people in the work of government, accorded 
by the constitutions which have been adopted, the laws which 
have been passed, and the extra-governmental and extra- 
constitutional devices to which resort has been had. In all 
the western European countries, including within them the 
United States, which possess written constitutions, the newer 
constitutions, and in England, which has no such instrument, 
the statutes of Parliament, have widened the suffrage. 

The frame of government itself has been so changed, either 
by constitutional provision or by extra-constitutional device, 
as to give the people themselves or the people's representatives 
greater control over the actual conduct of government. In 
England the establishment of cabinet government has made 

1 Goodnow, F. J., Politics and Administration. Macmillan, New York, 
1900 ; pp. 148-167. 



2 Readings on Parties and Elections 

the House of Commons, the representative of the people, the 
controlling governmental authority. In the United States the 
nomination of the President by the party conventions has 
brought the choice of the President one degree nearer the people 
than was originally contemplated by the Constitution. 

And yet, notwithstanding that popular government has thus 
been the ideal of the nineteenth century, few of the persons 
who hold this ideal have a clear idea of what popular govern- 
ment in its concrete manifestations really is. It is unquestion- 
ably true that most persons regard popular government as a 
system of government in which decisions as to political con- 
duct are the result of the conscious deliberations of the people. 
It is, however, just as unquestionably true that the forms of 
government which we are accustomed to regard as popular, 
and which are to be found in conditions of life at all complex, 
do not generally provide for any such conscious deliberation 
on the part of the people. 

Where conditions of life are at all complex, i.e. where the 
population is numerous and not thoroughly homogeneous, 
where the territory to be governed is extended and the distri- 
bution of wealth and intelligence is not comparatively equal, 
the necessities of the case have developed alongside of the 
formal governmental system more or less voluntary extra- 
governmental organizations, which exercise a controlling in- 
fluence on the formal governmental system. As Mr. Lowell 
points out, "A superficial glance at the history of democracy 
ought to be enough to convince us that in a great nation the 
people as a whole do not and cannot really govern. The fact 
is that we are ruled by parties whose action is more or less 
modified, but never completely directed, by public opinion . . . 
always more or less warped by the existence of party ties." 
Parties, although formed to secure certain ends, get to be 
ends in and of themselves. Party allegiance gets to replace, 
as a primary motive of conduct, adherence to political principle. 
The perpetuation of the party often appears more important 



Party Control of the Government 3 

than the ends for whose attainment the party itself originally 
was formed. 

Party leaders, on account of this important position assumed 
by the parties, often assume more importance as controlling 
factors in the political system than governmental officers. 
The aims of these party leaders must in large degree be the 
same as the aims of the party which they lead. They must 
strive in first instance for the perpetuation of the party. For 
the party is the instrument through which the ends for which 
the party was formed can be attained. The maintaining in its 
integrity and power of the party organization and the preserva- 
tion of successful party leadership are so necessary to the attain- 
ment of the ultimate ends of the party that the role of the 
members of the party ceases to be the positive determination 
of the party policy, and is reduced to the amendment or nega- 
tiving of propositions made by the party leaders. A body in 
which all shades of opinion exist and find expression is apt to 
be a debating society merely, incapable of positive action. 
But parties are formed for action rather than debate. They 
must accomplish something positive in the world of action. 
They must therefore follow rather than lead, and in order that 
they may follow they must have leaders capable of originating 
a policy which will approve itself to the party membership. 

Now, in order that government under parties shall be popu- 
lar, conditions must be such, both that the party, in whom 
the people as a whole do not have confidence, shall retire from 
the active control of the government, and that party leaders 
who in like manner have forfeited the confidence of the party 
shall retire from active control of the party. If these condi- 
tions do not exist, the system of government cannot be said to 
be popular. If they do exist, the government is probably as 
nearly popular as government ever has been or ever can be 
expected to be in any except the most primitive and simple 
social conditions. Certainly in the governments of states, 
possessing a highly developed civilization, with which we are 



4 Readings on Parties and Elections 

acquainted, the people as a whole have had no greater in- 
fluence on the conduct of public affairs. England, whose 
government may, perhaps, with the exceptions of the United 
States and Switzerland, be regarded as the most popular in 
existence, is a good example of this fact. 

When, after the struggles of the seventeenth century, Parlia- 
ment came to be regarded as the supreme authority in the Eng- 
lish government, no attempt was made by that body to carry on 
the government in the sense that it was to formulate a policy to 
be executed by the Crown. On the contrary, Parliament was 
content to play the subordinate role of approving or disapprov- 
ing a policy formulated by the Crown. (Such is the present 
condition in Germany, where strong parties have not developed.) 
The attempt made by William III to obtain the approval of his 
policy by Parliament through choosing as his ministers persons 
who had its confidence, soon led, under sovereigns less strong 
and less able, to Parliament's dictating to the Crown whom it 
should appoint as its ministers. As Mr. Lowell remarks, "The 
system which had been devised in order that the king might con- 
trol the House of Commons became, therefore, the means by 
which the House of Commons through its leaders controlled the 
king, and thus all the powers of the House of Commons and the 
Crown became vested in the same men, who guided legislation 
and took charge of administration at the same time." 

This relegation of the Crown to the position of one who reigned 
but did not govern did not, however, result, as might at first be 
supposed, in the adoption of the principle that the popular body 
could formulate policies to be executed by its servants. For, 
as Mr. Lowell says, the ministers not only "took charge of the 
administration," but also "guided legislation." It might be 
added that they also, as a result of their party leadership, do 
much in the election campaigns to determine the membership of 
the House of Commons whose legislation as ministers and mem- 
bers of that body they guide. 

Of course the present position of the ministers as leaders at 



Party Control of the Government 5 

the same time of legislation and administration was not at once 
worked out. But just so soon as this position was determined, 
and the localities in the kingdom, through the process of admin- 
istrative centralization which has been going on through this 
century, had been subordinated to the central government, the 
ministers became heirs to all the old powers of the English 
Crown, the recognized sovereign of the English people, and as 
such sovereign, from the legal point of view exercising all powers 
of government. 

At the present time the ministers unite in their hands powers 
of legislation and powers of administration with regard to both 
the central and local governments. They both formulate poli- 
cies and execute them after their formulation; and so long as 
their action meets with the approval of Parliament whose repre- 
sentatives they are, there is none to gainsay them. If, however, 
they fail to gain such approval, in accordance with constitu- 
tional practice, they must resign their powers to others whose 
policy is approved by Parliament. Finally, in order to make 
Parliament representative of the people, who in greater and 
greater numbers have been given the suffrage, the ministers are 
permitted to appeal from the decisions of Parliament to the peo- 
ple ; while Parliament itself, in case no such appeal was taken, 
is accustomed to dissolve of its own accord at least once in seven 
years. 1 

In this way the entire English government is made respon- 
sible to Parliament, which in its turn is responsible to the people. 
Such a system of government requires for its successful working 
the existence of reasonably strong and coherent parties, whose 
leaders are the ministers of the government when their party is 
in power. It does not, however, make nearly the demands on 
the party that are made by the American system of government. 
The necessary coordination of the expression and execution of 
the will of the state is obtained in, not outside of, the govern- 

1 The duration of a Parliament was reduced in 191 1 to five years instead 
of seven (Ed.). 



6 Readings on Parties and Elections 

mental system. Further, while no attempt is made in such a 
system to adopt the democratic ideal, as it has been described, 
that is to assure to the people or their representatives the formu- 
lation of policies whose execution is intrusted to ministerial 
subordinates, the system does secure to the representatives of 
the people and to the people as a whole the power to say nay 
to a policy of which they do not approve, and does insure that 
in case of the expression of such disapproval the persons in 
charge of the government shall give way to others more in ac- 
cord with the popular mind. . . 

The condition of things in this country is from the formal 
and theoretical point of view much the same as in England. In- 
deed, if anything, the formal American system of government 
would seem to assure greater popular responsibility than the 
English. The formal American executive is not hereditary as 
is the English Crown. Both houses of the American legislature 
have their origin in a direct or indirect popular vote, while mem- 
bership in the English House of Lords is inherited. 

The actual political conditions in America do not, however, 
permit of as great popular responsibility upon the part of the 
government as is secured by the actual political conditions in 
England. When the governments of the states of the United 
States were formed they evidenced the influence of the demo- 
cratic ideal to which cohesion has been made. That is, they 
were organized in such a way that questions of policy were to be 
determined by popular representative bodies — the legislatures 
— which were elected by a comparatively large number of peo- 
ple. These bodies not merely had the power to veto proposals 
made to them by the executive, but also themselves initiated 
policies, all the details of which they themselves determined. 
These policies were to be put into execution by other organs of 
government regarded as servants of the legislature, but on ac- 
count of their independent position not really subject to an 
effective legislative control. 

Now while the ideal of democracy was realized in the formal 



Party Control of the Government 7 

governmental systems thus established in the states, it was an 
ideal which was not realized in actual political practice. This 
ideal was not realized, although the form of government based 
upon it continued in existence. That it was not realized was 
due to the character of the political party organization through 
which the government came to be carried on. 

The earliest records we have of the organization and action 
of the political parties which were in existence at the time of 
the establishment of our state governments show that, notwith- 
standing the democratic forms of government, the actual deter- 
mination of the popular will was very largely controlled by a 
few people, who, by shrewd manipulation, and in some cases by 
questionable practices, succeeded in forcing or persuading the 
voters to follow their lead. . . 

This party system did not, however, fulfill the ideals of de- 
mocracy, and the attempt was made almost everywhere in this 
country to democratize the party machinery, so that it might in 
its outward manifestations conform to the ideals of democracy 
as expressed in the form of government which had been adopted. 
The party organization was, therefore, almost everywhere re- 
modelled. The party voters everywhere insisted that meetings 
should be held at which all of the members of the party might be 
present and act in the nomination of candidates, or in the elec- 
tion of delegates to act for them in conventions established for 
districts which were too large to permit of the direct action of 
the party members in the nomination of candidates. 

Senator Dallinger says, "By the beginning of the Revolution, 
the caucus or primary had become pretty well established in New 
England and the Middle States. With the close of the war it 
gradually lost its secret character which had been rendered neces- 
sary by the exigencies of the time, and became a miniature town 
meeting of the party voters of the ward or district. In New Eng- 
land, except in some of the large cities, and in those sections of 
the country settled by New England people, the caucus still 
retains its original town meeting character. But in the other 



8 Readings on Parties and Elections 

states with the growth of population the ' primary ' has come to 
be a mere polling-place for the election of delegates to the various 
conventions and of members of the local party committee, there 
being no opportunity whatever for any discussion of the merits 
of the various candidates. The inevitable result has been that 
the real work of nomination has largely fallen either into the 
hands of ' parlor caucuses ' ("The reader is not to infer that 
there are no parlor caucuses in New England; but where the 
caucus is a small body and opportunity is afforded for popular 
discussion of the merits of candidates, there is always a chance 
of breaking a 'slate' of a previous parlor caucus which does not 
exist where the primary is only a polling-place.") or of political 
committees and clubs — the power of the individual voter 
being restricted to the choice between candidates agreed 
upon at such preliminary secret conferences or named by 
such organizations." 

The result of the development of party organization in the 
United States has been that, notwithstanding the democratic 
form of the government and the likewise formally democratic 
character of the party organization, the political functions of 
the ordinary individual are confined to saying "Yes" or "No" 
to propositions made to him relative to the nomination or elec- 
tion of persons proposed for political or party- office by those in 
control of the party organization. The only instances where the 
voters of the party have positive initiation in the determination 
of who shall be the party candidates are, according to Senator 
Dallinger, in the rural districts of New England. Here the 
primary or caucus is described as " a miniature town meeting 
of the party voters," where "opportunity is afforded for public 
discussion of the merits of candidates," and "there is always a 
chance of breaking a 'slate' made at a previous parlor caucus." 
The reason why these exceptional conditions are found in the 
rural districts of New England is not far to seek. There we find 
both the conditions most favorable to the development of democ- 
racy, and a local-government system which almost from the 



Party Control of the Government 9 

beginning of the history of the country has accustomed the peo- 
ple as a whole to participate in politics. But even here it is to 
be noticed that the parlor caucus is not unknown, and the actual 
form of political action may consist rather in breaking than in 
making a slate. 

Actual political conditions in the United States thus resemble 
actual political conditions in England in that the people have 
little positive power in formulating and putting into execution 
their ideas relative to political conduct. 

Does the American system, however, resemble the English 
system in allowing the people both to retire from power a party 
in which they do not have confidence, and to retire from party 
leadership a party leader when they have ceased to approve of 
his policy? 

If we consider this question merely from the point of view 
of the governmental system, we must at once admit that the 
American system is not of such a character as to admit of as 
immediate responsiveness to the public will as is assured by the 
English system. Cabinet government, whatever may be its 
defects, does assure the possibility of at once finding out what is 
public opinion, so far as that is represented in Parliament, and 
of making that opinion effective. Presidential government, as 
our system has been called, makes this impossible on ac- 
count of the independent position of the executive. Differences 
between the legislative and the executive cannot be settled un- 
til the time fixed by the Constitution for the general elections. 
The fact that the legislature and the executive are elected in 
different ways makes it possible for such differences to exist im- 
mediately after the election. The governmental system being 
fixed in a written constitution cannot be changed by custom. 
Constitutional amendment is, in our experience, a slow and 
almost impossible method of political growth. 

The parties have had to develop extraordinary strength in 
order to be able to bring about harmony in the government. 
They had not merely to be very strong, they had also to be quite 



io Readings on Parties and Elections 

permanent, for they had to strive to control all branches of the 
government for quite a long period of time if they were to hope 
to see realized in political conduct the principles for which they 
were formed. Notwithstanding this strength and permanence, 
parties are only partially successful in doing the work devolved 
upon them by the American governmental system. There are 
too many instances of governmental deadlocks in our political 
life to permit us to believe that the efforts of parties have been 
absolutely successful. 

This great strength, this comparative permanence, which it is 
necessary that parties should have in order to do the work de- 
volved upon them by the formal governmental system, have 
unquestionably caused the party organizations to be less re- 
sponsive to the party will than is desirable. The individual 
members of the party have not only not been able to make the 
party leaders as responsive as might be wished, they have not 
desired to insist upon as full a measure of responsibility from 
party leaders as is desirable from their fear of weakening the 
party. This unwillingness on their part is in large measure due 
to their appreciation of the enormous task which our govern- 
mental system devolves upon the party, and to the feeling 
that the accomplishment of this task makes necessary that they 
evince willingness to forego a part of their political privileges, if 
through such action the party to which they have attached them- 
selves can be successful in obtaining control of the government. 
As in the case of national danger, the citizen is willing to pardon 
a degree of arbitrary action on the part of the government to 
which he would not submit in times of peace, so in face 
of the bitter political warfare which the American system 
of government would seem to promote, the party members 
will submit to action on the part of party leaders which in 
a more tranquil condition of things they would not hesitate to 
resent. 

The American political system as at present existing does 
not thus satisfy the demands of popular government, as they 



Party Control of the Government 1 1 

have been defined, in as full a measure as is desirable. It does 
not in the first place permit the easy retirement, from the con- 
trol of public affairs, of a party which has lost the confidence of 
the people. It does not in the second place give the party mem- 
bers, in case they disapprove of policies proposed by party leaders, 
the power to bring about as easily as is desirable a change in 
party leadership. 

If it be said that the electorate makes our governmental sys- 
tem popular, it may be answered that the power the people prac- 
tically have at an election is merely to choose between several 
candidates, none of whom they may desire, and who, if elected, 
do not have the power always to secure the adoption of the popu- 
lar policy. What the people should have, if the government is 
to be really popular in character, is the power at a given time to 
force an unpopular party out of the control of the government, 
and to oblige the party leaders in whom they do not have confi- 
dence to lay down their rights of leadership, giving place to 
others more in accord with the public will. Until such a condi- 
tion of things is reached, either within the government or the 
party, no government can be regarded as popular. 

That the English method of securing such a result, so far as 
may be, in the governmental organization, has great advantages, 
is not to be denied, although it may, of course, be doubted 
whether such a method would be applicable in this country. It 
may be that we shall have to get the same thing outside of our 
governmental system, and in our parties. The discontent with 
party management and the recent growth of the independent 
voting class would indicate that the people are gradually be- 
coming aware that our real political system is not what an ex- 
amination of our governmental system would at first lead an 
observer of it to think it is. The growing interest in methods of 
primary reform indicates, further, that the conviction is gaining 
ground that the point of attack by those who believe in the pres- 
ervation of popular government is not so much the formal 
governmental system as the party organization. 



12 Readings on Parties and Elections 

2. THE CONDITIONS OF PARTY GOVERNMENT IN THE UNITED 

STATES 1 

The development of parties in England has made them 
directly responsible for all important acts of the government. 
In the United States the form of our Constitution has made that 
responsibility less direct. 

The political party is a voluntary association which seeks to 
enlist a majority of voters under its banner and thereby gain 
control of the government. As the means employed by the ma- 
jority to make its will effective, it is irreconcilably opposed to all 
restraints upon its authority. Party government in this sense 
is the outcome of the efforts of the masses to establish their com- 
plete and untrammeled control of the state. 

This is the reason why conservative statesmen of the eight- 
eenth century regarded the tendency towards party govern- 
ment as the greatest political evil of the time. Far-sighted men 
saw clearly that its purpose was revolutionary; that if accom- 
plished, monarchy and aristocracy would be shorn of all power ; 
that the checks upon the masses would be swept away and the 
popular element made supreme. This would lead inevitably 
to the overthrow of the entire system of special privilege which 
centuries of class rule had carefully built up and protected. 

When our Constitution was framed responsible party gov- 
ernment had not been established in England. In theory the 
Constitution of Great Britain recognized three coordinate 
powers, the King, the Lords, and the Commons. But as a mat- 
ter of fact the government of England was predominantly aristo- 
cratic. The landed interests exerted a controlling influence 
even in the House of Commons. The rapidly growing impor- 
tance of capital had not yet seriously impaired the constitutional 
authority of the landlord class. Land had been until recently 
the only important form of wealth ; and the right to a voice in 

1 Smith, J. A., The Spirit of the American Government. Macmillan, New 
York, 1907. 



Party Control of the Government 13 

the management of the government was still an incident of land 
ownership. Men as such were not entitled to representation. 
The property-owning classes made the laws and administered 
them, officered the army and navy, and controlled the policy of 
the government in every direction. . . 

The framers of our Constitution, as shown in previous chap- 
ters, took the English government for their model and sought to 
establish the supremacy of the well-to-do classes. Like the 
English conservatives of that time they deplored the existence of 
political parties and consequently made no provision for them 
in the system which they established. Indeed, their chief pur- 
pose was to prevent the very thing which the responsible politi- 
cal party aimed to establish, viz., majority rule. 

The very existence of political parties would endanger the 
system which they set up, since in their efforts to strengthen 
and perpetuate their rule they would inevitably advocate ex- 
tensions of the suffrage, and thus in the end competition between 
parties for popular support would be destructive of all those 
property qualifications for voting and holding office which had 
up to that time excluded the propertyless classes from any par- 
ticipation in public affairs. Hence Washington though a staunch 
Federalist himself saw nothing inconsistent in trying to blend 
the extremes of political opinion by giving both Hamilton and 
Jefferson a place in his Cabinet. 

In England the party by the Reform bill of 1832 accomplished 
its purpose, broke through the barriers erected against it, 
divested the Crown of all real authority, subordinated the House 
of Lords, and established the undisputed rule of the majority in 
the House of Commons. This accomplished, it was inevitable 
that the rivalry between political parties should result in ex- 
tensions of the suffrage until the House should come to represent, 
as it does in practice to-day, the sentiment of the English people. 

The framers of the American Constitution, however, succeeded 
in erecting barriers which democracy has found it more difficult 
to overcome. For more than a century the constitutional bul- 



14 Readings on Parties and Elections 

warks which they raised against the rule of the numerical ma- 
jority have obstructed and retarded the progress of the demo- 
cratic movement. The force of public sentiment soon compelled, 
it is true, the adoption of the Twelfth Amendment, which in 
effect recognized the existence of political parties and made 
provision for the party candidate for President and Vice-Presi- 
dent. At most, however, it merely allowed the party to name 
the executive without giving it any effective control over him 
after he was elected, since in other respects the general plan of 
the Constitution remained unchanged. 

The political party, it is true, has come to play an impor- 
tant role under our constitutional system ; but its power and in- 
fluence are of a negative rather than a positive character. It 
professes, of course, to stand for the principle of majority rule, 
but in practice it has become an additional and one of the most 
potent checks on the majority. 

To understand the peculiar features of the American party 
system one must bear in mind the constitutional arrangements 
under which it has developed. The party is simply a voluntary 
political association through which the people seek to formulate 
the policy of the government, select the officials who are to carry 
it out in the actual administration of public affairs, and hold 
them to strict accountability for so doing. Under any govern- 
ment which makes full provision for the political party, as in the 
English system of to-day, the party has not only the power to 
elect but the power to remove those who are entrusted with the 
execution of its policies. Having this complete control of the 
government, it cannot escape responsibility for failure to carry 
out the promises by which it secured a majority at the polls. 
This is the essential difference between the English system on 
the one hand and the party under the American constitutional 
system on the other. The one well knows that if it carries the 
election it will be expected to make its promises good. The 
other makes certain promises with the knowledge that after the 
election is over it will probably have no power to carry them out. 









Party Control of the Government 15 

It is this lack of power to shape the entire policy of the gov- 
ernment which, more than anything else, has given form and 
character to the party system of the United States. To the 
extent that the Constitution has deprived the majority of the 
power to mold the policy of the government through voluntary 
political associations, it has defeated the main purpose for which 
the party should exist. 

The fact that under the American form of government the 
party cannot be held accountable for failure to carry out its 
ante-election pledges has had the natural and inevitable re- 
sult. When, as in England, the party which carries the election 
obtains complete and undisputed control of the government, 
the sense of responsibility is ever present in those who direct it. 
If in the event of its success it is certain to be called upon to 
carry out its promises, it cannot afford for the sake of obtaining 
votes to make promises which it has no intention of keeping. 
But when the party, even though successful at the polls, may 
lack the power to enforce its policy, it cannot be controlled by a 
sense of direct responsibility to the people. Promises may be 
recklessly and extravagantly made merely for the sake of get- 
ting votes. The party platform from the point of view of the 
party managers ceases to be a serious declaration of political 
principles. It comes to be regarded as a means of winning elec- 
tions rather than a statement of what the party is obligated 
to accomplish. 

The influence thus exerted by the Constitution upon our 
party system, though generally overlooked by students and 
critics of American politics, has had profound and far-reaching 
results. That the conduct of individuals is determined largely 
by the conditions under which they live is as well established as 
any axiom of political science. This must be borne in mind if 
we would fully understand the prevailing apathy — the seeming 
indifference to corruption and ring rule which has so long char- 
acterized a large class of intelligent and well-meaning American 
citizens. To ascribe the evils of our party system to their lack 



1 6 Readings on Parties and Elections 

of interest in public questions and their selfish disregard of civic 
duties, is to ignore an important phase of the problem — the 
influence of the system itself. In the long run an active general 
interest can be maintained only in those institutions from which 
the people derive some real or fancied benefit. This benefit in the 
case of the political party can come about only through the con- 
trol which it enables those who compose it to exercise over the 
government. And where, as under the American system, con- 
trol of the party does not ensure control of the government, the 
chief motive for an alert and unflagging interest in political ques- 
tions is lacking. If the majority cannot make an effective use 
of the party system for the attainment of political ends, they 
cannot be expected to maintain an active interest in party 
affairs. 

But although our constitutional arrangements are such as to 
deprive the people of effective control over the party, it has 
officers at its disposal and sufficient power to grant or revoke 
legislative favors to make control of its organization a matter of 
supreme importance to office seekers and various corporate in- 
terests. Thus while the system discourages an unselfish and 
public-spirited interest in party politics, it does appeal directly 
to those interests which wish to use the party for purely selfish 
ends. Hence the ascendency of the professional politician who, 
claiming to represent the masses, really owes his preferment to 
those who subsidize the party machine. 

The misrepresentative character of the American political 
party seems to be generally recognized by those who have inves- 
tigated the subject. It is only when we look for an explana- 
tion of this fact that there is much difference of opinion. The 
chief difficulty encountered by those who have given attention 
to this problem has been the point of view from which they have 
approached it. 

The unwarranted assumption almost universally made that 
the principle of majority rule is fundamental in our scheme of 
government has been a serious obstacle to any adequate inves- 



Party Control of the Government 17 

tigation of the question. Blind to the most patent defects of 
the Constitution, they have ignored entirely its influence upon 
the development and character of the political party. Taking 
it for granted that our general scheme of government was espe- 
cially designed to facilitate the rule of the majority, they have 
found it difficult to account for the failure of the majority to 
control the party machine. Why is it that under a system which 
recognizes the right and makes it the duty of the majority to 
control the policy of the government, that control has in prac- 
tice passed into the hands of a small minority who exercise it 
often in utter disregard of and even in direct opposition to the 
wishes and interests of the majority ? On the assumption that 
we have a Constitution favorable in the highest degree to democ- 
racy, how are we to explain the absence of popular control over 
the party itself? Ignoring the obstacles which the Constitu- 
tion has placed in the way of majority rule, American political 
writers have almost invariably sought to lay the blame for cor- 
ruption and machine methods upon the people. They would 
have us believe that if such evils are more pronounced here than 
elsewhere it is because in this country the masses control the 
government. 

If the assumption thus made concerning the nature of our 
political system were true, we would be forced to accept one of 
two conclusions : either that popular government inevitably 
results in the despotism of a corrupt and selfish oligarchy, or if 
such is not a necessary consequence, then at any rate the stan- 
dard of citizenship in this country intellectually and morally is 
not high enough to make democracy practicable. That the 
ignorance, selfishness and incapacity of the people are the real 
source of the evils mentioned is diligently inculcated by all those 
who wish to discredit the theory of popular government. No 
one knows better than the machine politician and his allies in 
the great corporate industries of the country how little control 
the people generally do or can exercise over the party under our 
present political arrangements. To disclose this fact to the 



1 8 Readings on Parties and Elections 

people generally, however, might arouse a popular movement of 
such magnitude as to sweep away the constitutional checks 
which are the source of their power. But as this is the very 
thing which they wish to prevent, the democratic character of 
the Constitution must be taken for granted; for by so doing 
the people are made to assume the entire responsibility for the 
evils which result from the practical operation of the system. 
And since the alleged democratic character of our political ar- 
rangements is, it is maintained, the real source of the evils com- 
plained of, the only effective remedy would be the restriction of 
the power of the people. This might take the form of additional 
constitutional checks which would thereby diminish the influence 
of a general election upon the policy of the government without 
disturbing the present basis of the suffrage ; or it might be ac- 
complished by excluding from the suffrage those classes deemed 
to be least fit to exercise that right. Either method would still 
further diminish the influence of the majority, and instead of 
providing a remedy for the evils of our system, would only in- 
tensify them, since it would augment the power of the minority, 
which is, as we have seen, the main source from which they 
proceed. 

A government which limits the power of the majority might 
promote the general interests of society more effectually than 
one controlled by the majority, if the checks were in the hands 
of a class of superior wisdom and virtue. But in practice such 
a government, instead of being better than those for whom it 
exists, is almost invariably worse. The complex and confus- 
ing system of checks, with the consequent diffusion of power 
and absence of direct and definite responsibility, is much bet- 
ter adapted to the purposes of a self-seeking, corrupt minority 
than to the ends of good government. The evils of such a sys- 
tem which are mainly those of minority domination must be 
carefully distinguished from those which result from majority 
control. The critics of American political institutions have as 
a rule ignored the former or constitutional aspect of our political 



Party Control of the Government 19 

evils, and have held majority rule accountable for much that 
our system of checks has made the majority powerless to pre- 
vent. The evils of our party system, having their roots in the 
lack of popular control over the party machine, are thus largely 
a consequence of the checks on the power of the majority con- 
tained in the Constitution itself. In other words, they are the 
outcome, not of too much, but of too little democracy. 

The advocates of political reform have directed their atten- 
■ tion mainly to the party machine. They have assumed that 
control of the party organization by the people would give them 
control of the government. If this view were correct, the evils 
which exist could be attributed only to the ignorance, want of 
public spirit and lack of capacity for effective political coopera- 
tion on the part of the people. But as a matter of fact this 
method of dealing with the problem is open to the objection that 
it mistakes the effect for the cause. It should be clearly seen 
that a system of constitutional checks, which hedges about the 
power of the majority on every side, is incompatible with ma- 
jority rule ; and that even if the majority controlled the party 
organization, it could control the policy of the government only 
by breaking down and sweeping away the barriers which the 
Constitution has erected against it. It follows that all attempts 
to establish the majority in power by merely reforming the party 
must be futile. 

Under any political system which recognizes the right of the 
majority to rule, responsibility of the government to the people 
is the end and aim of all that the party stands for. Party plat- 
forms and popular elections are not ends in themselves, but only 
means by which the people seek to make the government re- 
sponsive to public opinion. Any arrangement of constitutional 
checks, then, which defeats popular control, strikes down what 
is most vital and fundamental in party government. And since 
the party under our system cannot enforce public opinion, it is 
but natural that the people should lose interest in party affairs. 
This furnishes an explanation of much that is peculiar to the 



20 Readings on Parties and Elections 

American party system. It accounts for that seeming indif- 
ference and inactivity on the part of the people generally, which 
have allowed a small selfish minority to seize the party machinery 
and use it for private ends. . . 



3. THE NECESSITY OF STRONG PARTIES IN THE UNITED STATES l 

The federal nature of our government makes party control 
difficult. The dispersion of authority, however, increases the 
number of office holders who can be mustered to the support of 
a party. A strong organization must be formed to enable the 
party manager to control the extensive machinery by which 
voters and men in office can be kept loyal to the party. 

(Government) can be solidified and drawn to system only 
by the external authority of party, an organization outside the 
government and independent of it. Not being drawn together 
by any system provided in our constitutions, being laid apart, 
on the contrary, in a sort of jealous dispersion and analysis by 
Whig theory enacted into law, it has been necessary to keep the 
several parts of the government in some kind of workable com- 
bination by outside pressure, by the closely knit imperative dis- 
cipline of party, a body that has no constitutional cleavages and 
is free to tie itself into legislative and executive functions alike 
by its systematic control of the personnel of all branches of the 
government. 

Fortunately, the federal executive is not dispersed into its 
many elements as the executive of each of our States is. The 
dispersion of our state executive runs from top to bottom. The 
governor has no cabinet. The executive officers of state as- 
sociated with him in administration are elected as he is. Each 
refers his authority to particular statutes or particular clauses of 
the state constitution. Each is responsible politically to his 

1 Wilson, W., Constitutional Government in the United States. Columbia 
University Press, New York, 1908; pp. 204-213. 



Party Control of the Government 21 

constituents, the voters of the State, and, legally, to the courts 
and their juries. But in the federal government the executive 
is at least in itself a unit. Every one subordinate to the Presi- 
dent is appointed by him and responsible to him, both legally 
and politically. He can control the personnel and the action of 
the whole of the great "department" of government of which he 
is the head. The Whig doctrine is insisted on only with regard 
to dealings of the legislature or the executive with the courts. 
The three great functions of government are not to be merged 
or even drawn into organic cooperation, but are to be balanced 
against one another in a safe counterpoise. They are inter- 
dependent but organically disassociated; must cooperate, and 
yet are subject to no common authority. 

The way in which the several branches of the federal govern- 
ment have been separately organized and given efficiency in the 
discharge of their own functions has only emphasized their 
separation and jealous independence. The effective organiza- 
tion of the House under its committees and its powerful speaker, 
the organization of the Senate under its steering committees, 
the consolidation of the executive under the authority of the 
President, only render it the more feasible and the more likely 
that these several parts of the government will act with an all 
too effective consciousness of their distinct individuality and 
dignity, their distinct claim to be separately considered and 
severally obeyed in the shaping and conduct of affairs. They 
are not to be driven, and there is no machinery of which the 
Constitution knows anything by which they can be led and 
combined. 

It is for that reason that we have had such an extraordinary 
development of party authority in the United States and have 
developed outside the government itself so elaborate and effec- 
tive an organization of parties. They are absolutely necessary 
to hold things thus disconnected and dispersed together and 
give some coherence to the action of political forces. There 
are, as I have already explained in another connection, so many 



12 Readings on Parties and Elections 

officers to be elected that even the preparation of lists of candi- 
dates is too complicated and laborious a business to be under- 
taken by men busy about other things. Some one must make 
a profession of attending to it, must give it system and method. 
A few candidates for a few conspicuous offices which interested 
everybody, the voters themselves might select in the intervals 
of private business; but a multitude of candidates for offices 
great and small they cannot choose ; and after they are chosen 
and elected to office they are still a multitude, and there must 
be somebody to look after them in the discharge of their func- 
tions, somebody to observe them closely in action, in order that 
they may be assessed against the time when they are to be 
judged. Each has his own little legal domain ; there is no inter- 
dependence amongst them, no interior organization to hold them 
together. There must, therefore, be an exterior organization, 
voluntarily formed and independent of the law, whose object 
it shall be to bind them together in some sort of harmony and 
cooperation. That exterior organization is the political party. 
The hierarchy of its officers must supply the place of a hierarchy 
of legally constituted officials. 

Nowhere else is the mere maintenance of the machinery of 
government so complex and difficult a matter as in the United 
States. It is not as if there were but a single government to be 
maintained and officered. There are the innumerable offices of 
States, of counties, of townships, of cities, to be filled ; and it is 
only by elections, by the filling of offices, that parties test and 
maintain their hold upon public opinion. Their control of the 
opinion of the nation inevitably depends upon their hold on the 
many localities of which it is made up. If they lose their grip 
upon the petty choices which affect the daily life of counties 
and cities and states, they will inevitably lose their grip upon 
the greater matters, also, of which the action of the nation is 
made up. Parties get their coherence and prestige, their root- 
age and solidity, their mastery over men and events, from their 
command of detail, their control of the little tides that eventually 



Party Control of the Government 23 

flood the great channels of national action. No one realizes 
more completely the interdependence of municipal, state, and 
federal elections than do the party managers. Their parties 
cannot be one thing for the one set of elections and another for 
the other; and the complexity of the politician's task consists 
in the fact that, though from his point of view interdependent 
and intimately connected, the constantly recurring elections of 
a system under which everybody is elected are variously scat- 
tered in time and place and object. 

We have made many efforts to separate local and national 
elections in time in order to separate them in spirit. Many 
local questions upon which the voters of particular cities or 
counties or States are called upon to vote have no connection 
whatever either in principle or in object with the national ques- 
tions upon which the choice of congressmen and of presidential 
electors should turn. It is ideally desirable that the voter 
should be left free to choose the candidates of one party in lo- 
cal elections and the candidates of the opposite party in national 
elections. It is undoubtedly desirable that he should go further 
and separate matters of local administration from his choice of 
party altogether, choosing his local representatives upon their 
merits as men without regard to their party affiliations. We 
have hopefully made a score of efforts to obtain "non-partisan" 
local political action. But such efforts always in the long run 
fail. Local parties cannot be one thing for one purpose and 
another for another without losing form and discipline alto- 
gether and becoming hopelessly fluid. Neither can parties form 
and re-form, now for this purpose and again for that, or be for 
one election one thing and for another another. Unless they 
can have local training and constant rehearsal of their parts, 
they will fail of coherent organization when they address them- 
selves to the business of national elections. For national pur- 
poses they must regard themselves as parts of greater wholes, 
and it is impossible under such a system as our own that they 
should maintain their zest and interest in their business if their 



24 Readings on Parties and Elections 

only objects are distant and general objects, without local root- 
age or illustration, centering in Congress and utterly discon- 
nected with anything that they themselves handle. Local offices 
are indispensable to party discipline as rewards of local fidelity, 
as the visible and tangible objects of those who devote their 
time and energy to party organization and undertake to see to 
it that the full strength of the party vote is put forth when the 
several local sections of the party are called upon to unite for 
national purposes. If national politics are not to become a mere 
game of haphazard amidst which parties can make no calcula- 
tions whatever, systematic and disciplined connections between 
local and national affairs are imperative, and some instrument 
must be found to effect them. Whatever their faults and abuses, 
party machines are absolutely necessary under our existing elec- 
toral arrangements, and are necessary chiefly for keeping the 
several segments of parties together. No party manager could 
piece local majorities together and make up a national majority, 
if local majorities were mustered upon non-partisan grounds. 
No party manager can keep his lieutenants to their business who 
has not control of local nominations. His lieutenants do not 
expect national rewards: their vital rootage is the rootage of 
local opportunity. 

Just because, therefore, there is nowhere else in the world so 
complex and various an electoral machinery as in the United 
States, nowhere else in the world is party machinery so elabor- 
ate or so necessary. It is important to keep this in mind. 
Otherwise, when we analyze party action, we shall fall into the 
too common error of thinking that we are analyzing disease. 
As a matter of fact, the whole thing is just as normal and natural 
as any other political development. The part that party has 
played in this country has been both necessary and bene- 
ficial, and if bosses and secret managers are often undesirable 
persons, playing their parts for their own benefit or glorification 
rather than for the public good, they are at least the natural 
fruits of the tree. It has borne fruit good and bad, sweet 



Party Control of the Government 25 

and bitter, wholesome and corrupt, but it is native to our air 
and practice and can be up-rooted only by an entire change of 
system. 

All the peculiarities of party government in the United States 
are due to the too literal application of Whig doctrine, to the in- 
finite multiplication of elective offices. There are two things 
to be done for which we have supplied no adequate legal or con- 
stitutional machinery: there are thousands of officials to be 
chosen and there are many disconnected parts of government to 
be brought into cooperation. "It may be laid down as a politi- 
cal maxim that whatever assigns to the people a power which 
they are naturally incapable of wielding takes it away from 
them." They have, under our Constitution and statutes, been 
assigned the power of filling innumerable elective offices ; they 
are incapable of wielding that power because they have neither 
the time nor the necessary means of cooperative action; the 
power has therefore been taken away from them, not by law but 
by circumstances, and handed over to those who have the time 
and the inclination to supply the necessary organization; and 
the system of election has been transformed into a system of 
practically irresponsible appointment to office by private party 
managers, — irresponsible because our law has not yet been 
able to devise any means of making it responsible. It may also 
be laid down as a political maxim that when the several chief 
organs of government are separated by organic law and offset 
against each other in jealous seclusion, no common legal author- 
ity set over them, no necessary community of interest subsisting 
amongst them, no common origin or purpose dominating them, 
they must of necessity, if united at all, be united by pressure 
from without; and they must be united if government is to 
proceed. They cannot remain checked and balanced against 
one another ; they must act, and act together. They must, there- 
fore, of their own will or of mere necessity obey an outside 
master. 

Both sets of dispersions, the dispersion of offices and the 



i6 Readings on Parties and Elections 

dispersion of functions and authorities, have cooperated to 
produce our parties, and their organization. Through their 
caucuses, their county conventions, their state conven- 
tions, their national conventions, instead of through legis- 
latures and cabinets, they supply the indispensable means 
of agreement and cooperation, and direct the government of 
the country both in its policy and in its personnel. Their local 
managers make up the long and variegated lists of candidates 
made necessary under our would-be democratic practice ; their 
caucuses and local conventions ratify the choice; their state 
and national conventions add declarations of principle and deter- 
mine party policy. Only in the United States is party thus a 
distinct authority outside the formal government, expressing its 
purposes through its own separate and peculiar organs and per- 
mitted to dictate what Congress shall undertake and the na- 
tional administration address itself to. Under every other 
system of government which is representative in character and 
which attempts to adjust the action of government to the wishes 
and interests of the people, the organization of parties is, in a 
sense, indistinguishable from the organs of the government 
itself. Party finds its organic lodgment in the national legislature 
and executive themselves. The several active parts of the gov- 
ernment are closely united in organization for a common pur- 
pose, because they are under a common direction and them- 
selves constitute the machinery of party control. Parties do 
not have to supply themselves with separate organs of their own 
outside the government and intended to dictate its policy, be- 
cause such separate organs are unnecessary. The responsible 
organs of government are also the avowed organs of party. 
The action of opinion upon them is open and direct, not 
circuitous and secret. 

It is interesting to observe that as a consequence the dis- 
tinction we make between " politicians" and " statesmen" is 
peculiarly our own. In other countries where these words or 
their equivalents are used, the statesman differs from the poli- 



Party Control of the Government 27 

tician only in capacity and in degree, and is distinguished as a 
public leader only in being a greater figure on the same stage, 
whereas with us politicians and statesmen differ in kind. A 
politician is a man who manages the organs of the party outside 
the open field of government, outside executive offices and legis- 
lative chambers, and who conveys the behests of party to those 
who hold the offices and make laws ; while a statesman is the leader 
of public opinion, the immediate director (under the politicians) 
of executive or legislative policy, the diplomat, the recognized 
public servant. The politician, indeed, often holds public office 
and attempts the role of statesman as well, but, though the roles 
may be combined, they are none the less sharply distinguishable. 
Party majorities which are actually in control of the whole legis- 
lative machinery, as party majorities in England are, determine 
party programs by the use of the government itself, — their 
leaders are at once " politicians " and "statesmen"; and, the 
function being public, the politician is more likely to be swal- 
lowed up in the statesman. But with us, who affect never to 
allow party majorities to get in complete control of governmental 
machinery if we can prevent it by constitutional obstacles, 
party programs are made up outside legislative chambers, by 
conventions constituted under the direction of independent 
politicians, — politicians, I mean, who are, at any rate in respect 
of that function, independent of the responsibilities of office and 
of public action; and these independent conventions, not 
charged with the responsibility of carrying out their programs, 
actually outline the policy of administrations and dictate the 
action of Congress, the irresponsible dictating to the responsible, 
and so, it may be, destroying the very responsibility itself. 
"The peculiarities of American party government are all due to 
this separation of party management from direct and immediate 
responsibility for the administration of the government." 



28 Readings on Parties and Elections 

II. The Development of Party Organization in the 
United States 

i. (a) the early pear of party influence 1 

The makers of the Constitution looked upon political 
parties as pernicious. They sought to frame a government 
which would disregard them and base the elections on ability 
without any reference to "factional" divisions. 

Among the numerous advantages promised by a well con- 
structed union, none deserves to be more accurately developed 
than its tendency to break and control the violence of faction. 
The friend of popular governments, never finds himself so much 
alarmed for their character and fate, as when he contemplates 
their propensity to this dangerous vice. He will not fail, there- 
fore, to set a due value on any plan which, without violating 
the principles to which he is attached, provides a proper cure 
for it. The instability, injustice and confusion, introduced into 
the public councils, have in truth, been the mortal diseases under 
which popular governments have everywhere perished ; as they 
continue to be the favorite and fruitful topics from which the 
adversaries to liberty derive their most specious declamations. 
The valuable improvements made by the American constitutions 
on the popular models, both ancient and modern, cannot cer- 
tainly be too much admired ; but it would be an unwarrantable 
partiality, to contend that they have as effectually obviated 
the danger on this side, as was wished and expected. Com- 
plaints are everywhere heard from our most considerate and 
virtuous citizens, equally the friends of public and private faith, 
and of public and personal liberty, that our governments are 
too unstable; that the public good is disregarded in the 
conflicts of rival parties; and that measures are too often de- 
cided, not according to the rules of justice, and the rights of the 
minor party, but by the superior force of an interested and over- 
bearing majority. . . 

1 Madison, J., in the Federalist, No. X, 1787. 



Development of Party Organization 29 

By a faction, I understand a number of citizens, whether 
amounting to a majority or minority of the whole, who are 
united and actuated by some common impulse of passion, or of 
interest, adverse to the rights of other citizens, or to the per- 
manent and aggregate interests of the community. 

There are two methods of curing the mischiefs of faction: 
The one, by removing its causes; the other, by controlling its 
effects. 

There are again two methods of removing the causes of fac- 
tion: The one, by destroying the liberty which is essential to 
its existence; the other, by giving to every citizen the same 
opinions, the same passions, and the same interests. 

It could never be more truly said, than of the first remedy, 
that it was worse than the disease. Liberty is to faction, what 
air is to fire, an aliment without which it instantly expires. But 
it could not be a less folly to abolish liberty, which is essential 
to political life, because it nourishes faction, than it would be 
to wish the annihilation of air, which is essential to animal life, 
because it imparts to fire its destructive agency. 

The second expedient is as impracticable, as the first would 
be unwise. As long as the reason of man continues fallible, 
and he is at liberty to exercise it, different opinions will be 
formed. . . 

The latent causes of faction are thus sown in the nature of 
man; and we see them everywhere brought into different de- 
grees of activity, according to the different circumstances of 
civil society. A zeal for different opinions concerning religion, 
concerning government, and many other points, as well of specu- 
lation as of practice; an attachment to different leaders, am- 
bitiously contending for preeminence and power ; or to persons 
of other descriptions, whose fortunes have been interesting to 
the human passions, have, in turn, divided mankind into parties, 
inflamed them with mutual animosity, and rendered them much 
more disposed to vex and oppress each other, than to cooperate 
for their common good. So strong is this propensity of mankind, 



30 Readings on Parties and Elections 

to fall into mutual animosities, that where no substantial oc- 
casion presents itself, the most frivolous and fanciful distinc- 
tions have been sufficient to kindle their unfriendly passions, 
and excite their most violent conflicts. But the most common 
and durable source of factions, has been the various and unequal 
distribution of property. Those who hold, and those who are 
without property, have ever formed distinct interests in society. 
Those who are creditors, and those who are debtors, fall under a 
like discrimination. A landed interest, a manufacturing in- 
terest, a mercantile interest, a moneyed interest, with many 
lesser interests, grow up of necessity in civilized nations and 
divide them into different classes, actuated by different senti- 
ments and views. The regulation of these various and interfer- 
ing interests forms the principal task of modern legislation, and 
involves the spirit of party and faction in the necessary and ordi- 
nary operations of the government. 

No man is allowed to be a judge in his own cause; because 
his interest will certainly bias his judgment, and, not improbably, 
corrupt his integrity. With equal, nay with greater reason, a 
body of men are unfit to be both judges and parties at the same 
time; yet what are many of the most important acts of legis- 
lation but so many judicial determinations, not indeed con- 
cerning the rights of single persons, but concerning the rights of 
large bodies of citizens? and what are the different classes of 
legislators, but advocates and parties to the causes which they 
determine? Is a law proposed concerning private debts? It 
is a question to which the creditors are parties on one side, and 
the debtors on the other. Justice ought to hold the balance be- 
tween them. Yet the parties are, and must be, themselves the 
judges; and the most numerous party, or, in other words, the 
most powerful faction must be expected to prevail. Shall 
domestic manufactures be encouraged, and in what degree by 
restrictions on foreign manufactures ? are questions which would 
be differently decided by the landed and the manufacturing 
classes; and probably by neither with a sole regard to justice 



Development of Party Organization 3 1 

and the public good. The apportionment of taxes on the vari- 
ous descriptions of property, is an act which seems to require 
the most exact impartiality ; yet there is, perhaps, no legislative 
act in which greater opportunity and temptation are given to a 
predominant party, to trample on the rules of justice. Every 
shilling, with which they overburden the inferior number, is a 
shilling saved to their own pockets. 

It is in vain to say, that enlightened statesmen will be able to 
adjust these clashing interests, and render them all subservient 
to the public good. Enlightened statesmen will not always be 
at the helm: nor in many cases, can such an adjustment be 
made at all, without taking into view indirect and remote con- 
siderations, which will rarely prevail over the immediate in- 
terest which one party may find in disregarding the rights of 
another, or the good of the whole. 

The inference to which we are brought is, that the causes of 
faction cannot be removed ; and that relief is only to be sought 
in the means of controlling its effects. 

If a faction consists of less than a majority, relief is supplied 
by the republican principle, which enables the majority to de- 
feat its sinister views, by regular vote. It may clog the admin- 
istration, it may convulse the society ; but it will be unable to 
execute and mask its violence under the forms of the constitu- 
tion. When a majority is included in a faction, the form of 
popular government, on the other hand, enables it to sacrifice 
to its ruling passion or interest, both the public good and the 
rights of other citizens. To secure the public good, and private 
rights, against the danger of such a faction, and at the same time 
to preserve the spirit and the form of popular government, is 
then the great object to which our inquiries are directed. Let 
me add, that it is the great desideratum, by which alone this 
form of government can be rescued from the opprobrium under 
which it has so long labored, and be recommended to the esteem 
and adoption of mankind. 

By what means is this object attainable ? Evidently by one 



32 Readings on Parties and Elections 

of two only. Either the existence of the same passion or in- 
terest in a majority, at the same time, must be prevented; or 
the majority, having such coexistent passions or interest, must 
be rendered, by their number and local situation, unable to con- 
cert and carry into effect schemes of oppression. If the impulse 
and the opportunity be suffered to coincide, we well know, that 
neither moral nor religious motives can be relied on as an ade- 
quate control. They are not found to be such on the injustice 
and violence of individuals, and lose their efficacy in proportion 
to the number combined together; that is, in proportion as 
their efficacy becomes needful. 

From this view of the subject, it may be concluded, that a 
pure democracy, by which I mean a society consisting of a small 
number of citizens, who assemble and administer the govern- 
ment in person, can admit of no cure from the mischiefs of fac- 
tion. A common passion or interest will, in almost every case 
be felt by a majority of the whole ; a communication and con- 
cert, results from the form of government itself; and there is 
nothing to check the inducements to sacrifice the weaker party, 
or an obnoxious individual. Hence it is, that such democracies 
have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention ; have 
ever been found incompatible with personal security, or the 
rights of property; and have in general, been as short in their 
lives as they have been violent in their deaths. . . 

A republic, by which I mean a government in which the scheme 
of representation takes place, opens a different prospect, and 
promises the cure for which we are seeking. Let us examine 
the points in which it varies from a pure democracy, and we 
shall comprehend both the nature of the cure and the efficacy 
which it must derive from the union. 

The two great points of difference, between a democracy and 
a republic, are, first, the delegation of the government, in the 
latter, to a small number of citizens elected by the rest ; secondly, 
the greater number of citizens, and greater sphere of country, 
over which the latter may be extended. 



Development of Party Organization 33 

The effect of the first difference is, on the one hand, to refine 
and enlarge the public views, by passing them through the 
medium of a chosen body of citizens, whose wisdom may best 
discern the true interest of their country, and whose patriotism 
and love of justice, will be least likely to sacrifice it to temporary 
or partial considerations. . . 

The other point of difference is, the greater number of citizens 
and extent of territory, which may be brought within the com- 
pass of republican, than of democratic government; and it is 
this circumstance principally which renders factious combina- 
tions less to be dreaded in the former, than in the latter. The 
smaller the society, the fewer probably will be the distinct parties 
and interests composing it; the fewer the distinct parties and 
interests, the more frequently will a majority be found of the same 
party ; and the smaller the number of individuals composing a 
majority, and the smaller the compass within which they are 
placed, the more easily will they concert and execute their plans 
of oppression. Extend the sphere, and you take in a greater 
variety of parties and interests ; you make it less probable that 
a majority of the whole will have a common motive to invade 
the rights of other citizens, or if such a common motive exists, 
it will be more difficult for all who feel it to discover their own 
strength, and to act in unison with each other. Besides other 
impediments, it may be remarked, that where there is a con- 
sciousness of unjust or dishonorable purposes, communication 
is always checked by distrust, in proportion to the number whose 
concurrence is necessary. 

(b) THE EARLY FEAR OF PARTY INFLUENCE 1 

Here, perhaps, I ought to stop. But a solicitude for your 
welfare, which cannot end but with my life, and the apprehension 
of danger, natural to that solicitude, urge me on an occasion like 

1 Washington, G., Farewell Address. Writings of Washington, Evans, 
L. B., ed. Putnam's, New York, 1908; p. 539 et seq. (excerpt). 



34 Readings on Parties and Elections 

the present, to offer to your solemn contemplation, and to rec- 
ommend to your frequent review, some sentiments ; which are 
the result of much reflection, of no inconsiderable observation, 
and which appear to me all-important to the permanency of 
your felicity as a People. These will be offered to you with the 
more freedom, as you can only see in them the disinterested 
warnings of a parting friend, who can possibly have no personal 
motive to bias his counsels. Nor can I forget, as an encourage- 
ment to it your indulgent reception of my sentiments on a former 
and not dissimilar occasion. . . 

To the efficacy and permanency of your Union, a Government 
for the whole is indispensable. No alliances however strict be- 
tween the parts can be an adequate substitute. They must in- 
evitably experience the infractions and interruptions which all 
alliances in all times have experienced. Sensible of this momen- 
tous truth, you have improved upon your first essay, by the 
adoption of a Constitution of Government, better calculated 
than your former for an intimate Union, and for the efficacious 
management of your common concerns. This government, the 
offspring of your own choice uninfluenced and unawed, adopted 
upon full investigation and mature deliberation, completely 
free in its principles, in the distribution of its powers, uniting 
security with energy, and containing within, itself a provision 
for its own amendment, has a just claim to your confidence and 
your support. Respect for its authority, compliance with its 
Laws, acquiescence in its measures, are duties enjoined by the 
fundamental maxims of true Liberty. The basis of our political 
systems is the right of the people to make and to alter their Con- 
stitutions of Government. But the Constitution which at any 
time exists, till changed by an explicit and authentic act of the 
whole people, is sacredly obligatory upon all. The very idea of 
the power and the right of the people to establish Government, 
presupposes the duty of every individual to obey the established 
Government. 

All obstructions to the execution of the Laws, all combinations 



Development of Party Organization 35 

and associations, under whatever plausible character, with the 
real design to direct, controul, counteract, or awe the regular 
deliberation and action of the constituted authorities, are de- 
structive of this fundamental principle, and of fatal tendency. 
They serve to organize faction, to give it an artificial and ex- 
traordinary force — to put, in the place of the delegated will of 
the Nation, the will of a party ; — often a small but artful and 
enterprising minority of the community ; — and, according to 
the alternate triumphs of different parties, to make the public 
administration the mirror of the ill-concerted and incongruous 
projects of faction, rather than the organ of consistent and whole- 
some plans digested by common councils, and modified by mu- 
tual interests. However combinations or associations of the 
above description may now and then answer popular ends, they 
are likely, in the course of time and things, to become potent 
engines, by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men 
will be enabled to subvert the Power of the People and to usurp 
for themselves the reins of Government ; destroying afterwards 
the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion. 

Towards the preservation of your Government and the per- 
manency of your present happy state, it is requisite, not only 
that you steadily discountenance irregular oppositions to its 
acknowledged authority, but also that you resist with care the 
spirit of innovation upon its principles, however specious the 
pretexts. One method of assault may be to effect, in the forms 
of the Constitution, alterations which will impair the energy 
of the system, and thus to undermine what cannot be directly 
overthrown. In all the changes to which you may be invited, 
remember that time and habit are at least as necessary to fix 
the true character of Governments, as of other human institu- 
tions — that experience is the surest standard, by which to test 
the real tendency of the existing Constitution of a Country — 
that facility in changes upon the credit of mere hypothesis and 
opinion exposes to perpetual change, from the endless variety 
of hypothesis and opinion: — and remember, especially, that 



36 Readings on Parties and Elections 

for the efficient management of your common interests, in a coun- 
try so extensive as ours, a Government of as much vigour as is 
consistent with the perfect security of Liberty is indispensable. 
Liberty itself will find in such a Government, with powers 
properly distributed and adjusted, its surest Guardian. It 
is indeed little else than a name, where the Government is too 
feeble to withstand the enterprises of faction, to confine each 
member of the Society within the limits prescribed by the laws, 
and to maintain all in the secure and tranquil enjoyment of the 
rights of person and property. 

I have already intimated to you the danger of Parties in the 
State, with particular reference to the founding of them on Geo- 
graphical discriminations. Let me now take a more compre- 
hensive view, and warn you in the most solemn manner against 
the baneful effects of the Spirit of Party, generally. 

This Spirit, unfortunately, is inseparable from our nature, 
having its root in the strongest passions of the human mind. 
It exists under different shapes in all Governments, more or less 
stifled, controuled, or represented ; but, in those of the popular 
form, it is seen in its greatest rankness, and is truly their worst 
enemy. 

The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharp- 
ened by the spirit of revenge natural to party dissension, which 
in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid 
enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at 
length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The dis- 
orders and miseries, which result, gradually incline the minds of 
men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an In- 
dividual : and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing fac- 
tion, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns 
this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins 
of Public Liberty. 

Without looking forward to an extremity of this kind, (which 
nevertheless ought not to be entirely out of sight), the common 
and continual mischiefs of the spirit of Party are sufficient to 



Development of Party Organization 37 

make it the interest and duty of a wise People to discourage and 
restrain it. 

It serves always to distract the Public Councils, and enfeeble 
the Public administration. It agitates the community with ill- 
founded jealousies and false alarms, kindles the animosity of 
one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrec- 
tion. It opens the doors to foreign influence and corruption, 
which find a facilitated access to the Government itself through 
the channels of party passions. Thus the policy and the will 
of one country, are subjected to the policy and will of another. 

There is an opinion that parties in free countries are useful 
checks upon the Administration of the Government, and serve 
to keep alive the Spirit of Liberty. This within certain limits 
is probably true — and in Governments of a Monarchical cast, 
Patriotism may look with indulgence, if not with favour, upon 
the spirit of party. But in those of the popular character, in 
Governments purely elective, it is a spirit not to be encouraged. 
From their natural tendency, it is certain there will always be 
enough of that spirit for every salutary purpose, — and there 
being constant danger of excess, the effort ought to be, by force 
of public opinion, to mitigate and assuage it. A fire not to be 
quenched ; it demands a uniform vigilance to prevent its burst- 
ing into a flame, lest, instead of warming, it should consume. 

2. EARLY MENTION OF CAUCUSES AND THEIR IMPORTANCE 1 

Informal meetings to agree on a united method of action 
in the elections date from before the Revolution. The most 
famous of these early clubs is doubtless the Boston Caucus Club, 
one of whose meetings is here described by John Adams. 

Boston. February. This day learned that the Caucus Club 
meets, at certain times in the garret of Tom Dawes, the Adjutant 
of the Boston Regulars. He has a large house, and he has a 

1 Adams, John. The Works of John Adams, edited by C. F. Adams. 
Little and Brown, Boston, 1850; Vol. II, p. 144. 



38 Readings on Parties and Elections 

movable partition in bis garret which he takes down, and the 
whole club meets in one room. There they smoke tobacco till 
you cannot see from one end of the garret to the other. There 
they drink flip, I suppose, and there they choose a moderator, 
who puts questions to the vote regularly ; and selectmen, as- 
sessors, collectors, wardens, fire-wards, and representatives, are 
regularly chosen before they are chosen in the town. Uncle 
Fairfield, Story, Ruddock, Adams, Cooper, and a rudis indiges- 
tague moles of others are members. 1 They send committees to 
wait on the merchant's club, and to propose and join in the 
choice of men and measures. Captain Cunningham says, they 
have often solicited him to go to those caucuses ; they have as- 
sured him benefits in his business, etc. 

1 Gordon assigns a very early date for this practice. He says : "More than 
fifty years ago," (from 1774), "Mr. Samuel Adams's father and twenty others, 
one or two from the north end of the town, where all the ship business is 
carried on, used to meet, make a caucus, and lay their plan for introducing 
certain persons into places of trust and power. When they had settled it, 
they separated, and used each their particular influence within his own circle. 
He and his friends would furnish themselves with ballots, including the names 
of the parties fixed upon, which they distributed on the days of election. By 
acting in concert, together with a careful and extensive distribution of bal- 
lots, they generally carried the elections to their own mind. In like manner 
it was, that Mr. Samuel Adams first became a representative for Boston." 
— History of the American Revolution, Vol. I, p. 365, note. 

3. THE CONGRESSIONAL CAUCUS l 

The National Government did not remain free from polit- 
ical struggles as the founders had wished. The legislature 
soon became the battle ground of the parties. This was a nat- 
ural development, for there were gathered representatives from 
the various districts who had the party interests constantly in 
mind. Unfortunately only those districts were represented at 
the party councils which had been controlled by the party at 
the previous election. Difficulty of communication, however, 

1 Ostrogorski, M., Democracy and the Organization of Political Parties. 
Macmillan, New York, 1902; Vol. II, pp. 13-19. 



Development of Party Organization 39 

made any other method of organization even less satisfactory. 
Undemocratic though it was, the congressional caucus and the 
corresponding legislative caucus in the states became the ac- 
cepted method of united party action. 

In the first two presidential elections the choice of the can- 
didates took place of itself, so to speak : Washington was marked 
out on all sides for the chief magistracy of the new republic ; he 
was elected and re-elected by acclamation to the Presidency, 
and with him John Adams to the Vice-Presidency. But after 
Washington's imminent retirement, in 1796, the struggle began. 
About the anti-Federalist candidate there were no differences 
of opinion ; he was, of course, Thomas Jefferson, while on the 
Federalist side there was not the same unanimity in favour of 
John Adams, whose occupancy of the dignity of Vice-President 
for eight years, by the side of Washington, pointed him out as 
the latter's successor. In spite of some intrigues against him 
within the ranks of the Federalists, he was nevertheless elected. 
But the antipathy with which he inspired several Federalist 
leaders, and especially Hamilton, broke out with renewed vigour 
at the approach of the election of 1800. The want of unanimity 
in the Federalist camp was aggravated by the confusion caused 
by the death of Washington, whose great prestige alone still 
shielded the Federalist party, which was daily losing ground in 
the country although it had a majority in Congress. The im- 
minent danger of the success of Jefferson and of the triumph of 
radicalism in the government appeared to the Federalists of the 
Congress to demand their intervention in the presidential elec- 
tion, from which the Constitution had carefully banished them. 
For some time past the Federalist members of Congress, and 
the Senators in the first place, had been in the habit of holding 
semi-official meetings, to which the familiar name of caucus was 
applied, to settle their line of conduct beforehand on the most 
important questions coming before Congress. The decisions 
arrived at by the majority of the members present were consid- 
ered as in honour binding the minority; being consequently 



40 Readings on Parties and Elections 

clothed with a moral sanction, they gave these confabulations 
an equitable basis and almost a legal authority. In this way 
there grew up at an early stage, at the very seat of Congress, an 
extra-constitutional institution which prejudged and anticipated 
its acts. It was now about to reach out still further and lay 
hold of a matter which was entirely beyond the competence of 
Congress. It appears that this was done at the instigation of 
Hamilton, who, being anxious to push Adams on one side and 
to prevent the election of Jefferson, wanted to get the electoral 
manoeuvre which he had hit upon for this purpose sanctioned by 
a formal decision of the members of the party in Congress. The 
latter took the decision, nominated in consequence the candi- 
dates for the Presidency and the Vice-Presidency of the Union, 
and agreed to try and get them accepted by the Electors. This 
nomination became the precedent for a practice which completely 
destroyed the whole scheme of the provisions of the Constitution 
for the election of the President. The electoral device adopted 
by the Federalist caucus became known through a private letter 
from one of its members to his constituents ; the Caucus took 
care not to give it out in its own name, it wrapped all its pro- 
ceedings in profound secrecy. And when a journalist of the 
opposition, the famous W. Duane, denounced them in his paper 
Aurora, published at Philadelphia, and attacked the actual prac- 
tice of the caucuses, the " Jacobinical conclave," he was called 
before the bar of the Senate for his "falsely defamatory, scan- 
dalous, and malicious assertions," and barely managed to escape 
from the formal proceedings which had been taken against him. 
In their anti-Federalist press of Boston a violent protest was 
also made against "the arrogance of a number of Congress to 
assemble as an electioneering caucus to control the citizens in 
their constitutional rights." But this did not prevent the Re- 
publicans themselves, the anti-Federalist members of Congress, 
from holding a caucus, also secret, for the nomination of candi- 
dates to the two highest executive offices of the Union; they 
had only to concern themselves with the Vice-Presidency, how- 



Development of Party Organization 41 

ever, since Jefferson's candidature for the first of these posts 
was a foregone conclusion. It seems that Madison, the future 
President of the United States, took the leading part in this 
caucus. 

At the next presidential election, in 1804, the Congressional 
Caucus reappeared, but on this occasion it no longer observed 
secrecy. The Republican members of Congress met publicly 
and settled the candidatures with all the formalities of delibera- 
tive assemblies, as if they were acting in pursuance of their man- 
date. The Federalists, who were almost annihilated as a party 
since Jefferson's victory, in 1801, gave up holding caucuses al- 
together. Henceforth there met only a Republican Congres- 
sional Caucus, which appeared on the scene every four years 
at the approach of the presidential election. To strengthen 
its action in the country it provided itself (in 181 2) with a special 
organ in the form of a corresponding committee, in which each 
State was represented by a member, and which saw that the 
decisions of the Caucus were respected. Sometimes the state 
Caucuses intervened in the nomination of candidates for the 
presidency of the Republic; they proposed names, but in any 
event the Congressional Caucus always had the last word. 
Thus in 1808, with two powerful competitors for the succession 
to Jefferson, Madison and Monroe, both put forward in the 
influential Caucus of Virginia, the Congressional Caucus pro- 
nounced for Madison, while taking the formal precaution to de- 
clare that the persons present made this recommendation in 
their " private capacity of citizens." Several members of Con- 
gress, who did not want to have Madison, appealed to the coun- 
try, protesting not only against the regularity of the procedure 
of the Caucus, but also against the institution of the Caucus 
itself. The Caucus none the less won the day, the whole party 
in the country accepted its decision, and Madison was elected. 
The same thing took place in 181 2, in spite of an attempted 
split in the State of New York, the Legislature of which officially 
brought forward its illustrious statesman, DeWitt Clinton, 



42 Readings on Parties and Elections 

against Madison, who was seeking re-election. In vain did the 
Legislature of New York, in a manifesto issued for the occasion, 
try to stir up local jealousies, by protesting against the habitual 
choice for the presidency of citizens of the State of Virginia, 
against the perpetuation of the "Virginia dynasty" ; in vain did 
it appeal to democratic susceptibilities by denouncing the usurpa- 
tion by the coterie of the Congressional Caucus of a right be- 
longing to the people. Madison was re-elected. In 1816, when 
the Caucus met again to choose a successor to Madison, Henry 
Clay brought in a motion declaring the nomination of the Presi- 
dent in caucus inexpedient, but his proposal was rejected ; a sim- 
ilar resolution introduced by another member shared the same 
fate. The Caucus adopted the candidature of Monroe, who 
was Madison's favourite, just as this latter was in a way desig- 
nated to the Caucus by his predecessor Jefferson. The majority 
obtained by Monroe was but slight (65 votes to 54), but as soon 
as the result was announced Clay at once requested the assembly 
to make Monroe's nomination unanimous. Such was the weight 
which the decision of the majority of the Caucus had with every 
member, that it was considered binding in honour on him as well 
as on every adherent of the party in the country who did not 
care to incur the reproach of political heresy, of apostasy. Under 
cover of these notions there arose in the American electorate 
the convention, nay, the dogma, of regular candidatures, adopted 
in party councils, which alone have the right to court the popu- 
lar suffrage. Complying with this rule, the Electors, who, ac- 
cording to the Constitution, were to be the unfettered commis- 
sioners of the people in the choice of the chief magistrate, and 
to consult only their judgment and their conscience, simply 
registered the decision taken at Washington by the Congressional 
Caucus. 

The authority of the Congressional Caucus which got its rec- 
ommendations accepted with this remarkable alacrity and made 
the "nomination" equivalent to the election, rested on two facts. 
On the one hand, there was the prestige attaching to the rank of 



Development of Party Organization 43 

the men who composed the Caucus and to their personal posi- 
tion in the country. They represented in the capital of the 
Union the same social and political element, and in a still higher 
degree, which the members of the legislative caucuses represented 
in the States, that is, the leadership of the natural chiefs, whose 
authority was still admitted and tacitly acknowledged. . . 

The members of the Congressional Caucus and the members 
of the legislative caucuses of the States, or, to use Hamilton's 
expression, "the leaders of the second class" constituted in fact 
a sort of political family, and the latter spontaneously became 
the agents of the Congressional Caucus ; they were, in the lan- 
guage of a contemporary, "as prefects" to it, set in motion by 
a simple exchange of private letters. 

Again, the members of the Caucus represented the force ma- 
jeure of the interests of the Republican party, which enforced dis- 
cipline, which compelled obedience to the word of command from 
whatever quarter it proceeded. Rightly or wrongly, the anti- 
Federalists believed that the Republic and liberty were in mortal 
danger, that they were menaced by the Federalists, whose polit- 
ical ideal was the English constitutional monarchy, and who, 
having no confidence in the people, in its intelligence and its 
virtue, were bent on an authoritarian "consolidated" gov- 
ernment. . . 

The Federalist party soon succumbed, but the recollection of 
the dangers, real or imaginary, to which liberty and equality 
were exposed by it, survived it and for many a long day was a 
sort of bugbear which the leaders of the victorious party had no 
scruple about using for the consolidation of their power. To 
prevent the Federalists from returning to the charge, the Repub- 
licans had to carefully guard against divisions, and it was to avoid 
them, to concentrate all the forces of the party in the great fight 
for the Presidency, that the Congressional Caucus obligingly 
offered its services. 



44 Readings on Parties and Elections 



4. HOW THE CONGRESSIONAL NOMINATING CAUCUS WORKED 1 

The following account gives a picture of the Congressional 
Caucus just before it was discarded as a means of nominating 
the President. 



CHAMBER OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTA- 
TIVES OF THE UNITED STATES. 

February 14, 1S24. 

At a meeting of the republican members of Congress, as- 
sembled this evening pursuant to public notice, for the purpose 
of recommending to the people of the United States suitable 
persons to be supported at the approaching election, for the 
offices of president and vice president of the United States : 

On motion of Mr. James Barbour, of Virginia — 

Mr. Benjamin Ruggles, a senator from the state of Ohio, was 
called to the chair, and Mr. Ela Collins, a representative from 
the state of New York, was appointed secretary. 

Resolved, That this meeting do now proceed to designate, by 
ballot, a candidate for president of the United States. 

Determined in the affirmative. 

On motion of Mr. Van Buren of New York, it was 

Resolved, That the Chairman call up the republican members 
of congress by states, in order to receive their respective ballots. 

Whereupon the Chairman proceeded to a call, and it appeared 
the following members were present. . . 

Mr. Bassett, of Virginia, and Mr. Cambrelong, of New York, 
were appointed tellers, and, on counting the ballots, it appeared 
that 

William H. Crawford had sixty-four votes, 

John Quincy Adams two votes, 

Andrew Jackson one vote, and 

Nathaniel Macon one vote. 

1 Niles, Weekly Register, I, 3d ser., 388 et seq. 



Development of Party Organization 45 

Mr. Dickinson of New York then submitted the following 
resolution, which was agreed to : 

Resolved, That this meeting do now proceed to designate, by- 
ballot, a candidate for the office of vice president of the United 
States. 

Mr. Van Buren, of New York, then stated that he was author- 
ized to say that the vice president having, some time since, de- 
termined to retire from public life, did not wish to be regarded 
by his friends as a candidate for reelection to that office. 

On counting the ballots, it appeared that Albert Gallatin, of 
Pennsylvania, had fifty-seven votes ; John Q. Adams of Massa- 
chusetts, one vote; Samuel Smith of Maryland, one vote; 
William King of Maine, one vote; Richard Rush of Penn- 
sylvania, one vote ; Erastus Root of New York, two votes ; John 
Tod of Pennsylvania, one vote ; and Walter Lowrie of Penn- 
sylvania, one vote. 

And, thereupon, Mr. Clark of New York submitted the fol- 
lowing resolution, to wit : 

Resolved, As the sense of this meeting that William H. Craw- 
ford, of Georgia, be recommended to the people of the United 
States as a proper candidate for the office of president, and 
Albert Gallatin, of Pennsylvania, for the office of vice presi- 
dent of the United States, for four years from the 4th of 
March 1825. 

Resolved, That, in making the foregoing recommendation, 
the members of this meeting have acted in their individual char- 
acters, as citizens ; that they have been induced to this measure 
from a deep and settled conviction of the importance of union 
among republicans, throughout the United States, and, as the 
best means of collecting and concentrating the feelings and wishes 
of the people of the union, upon this important subject. The 
question being put upon these resolutions, they were unani- 
mously agreed to. 

Mr. Holmes of Maine then moved that the proceedings of the 
meeting be signed by the chairman and secretary, and published, 



46 Readings on Parties and Elections 

together with an address to the people of the United States, to 
be prepared by a committee to be appointed for the purpose. 

On motion, it was ordered that this committee consist of 
the chairman and secretary of the convention, together with the 
gentlemen whose names were signed to the notice calling the 
meeting. 

On motion, it was further 

Resolved, That the chairman and secretary inform the gentle- 
men nominated for the offices of president and vice president of 
their nomination, and learn from them whether they are will- 
ing to serve in the said offices, respectively. 

Benjamin Ruggles, Chairman. 

E. Collins, Secretary. 

5. THE TRANSITION FROM THE CONGRESSIONAL CAUCUS TO THE 
NOMINATING CONVENTION l 

With improved methods of communication, and greater in- 
terest in politics on the part of the people, the feeling developed 
that the Legislative or Congressional Caucus was a usurpation 
by a few officeholders of the right to control the party machinery. 
A revolt within the party, to make the organization more demo- 
cratic, arose which resulted in the creation of the modern nomi- 
nating convention. 

12. Previous to the election of 1824, . . . candidates for 
the Presidency were nominated by a Congressional caucus. 
With the commencement of the revolt against the caucus sys- 
tem several other methods of nomination sprang up which, dur- 
ing the campaign of 1828, obtained possession of the field. The 
first of these methods is that of nomination by a State legislature 
acting in its official capacity. This was not an entirely new 
method. In 1807 President Jefferson received addresses from 
the legislatures of several states, approving the general course of 
his administration, and asking him to accept for the third time 

1 Dallinger, F. W., Nominations for Elective Office. Longmans, New York, 
1903 ; pp. 29-34. 



Development of Party Organization 47 

the Republican nomination. During the same year both 
branches of the Kentucky Legislature unanimously recommended 
James Madison as a candidate for the Presidency. In all the 
cases previous to 1824, however, the real work of nomination 
was in the hands of the Congressional caucus, the action of the 
legislatures being entirely subsidiary. It was not until the cam- 
paign of 1824 that nomination "by act of the legislature" came 
to have any real significance. The form of such nominations is 
very well shown by the joint resolution adopted by the Alabama 
Legislature in 1824 recommending Andrew Jackson for the Presi- 
dency. After a long preamble comes the following resolution: 

Be it therefore resolved by the Senate and House of Represen- 
tatives of the State of Alabama in general assembly convened 
that we believe it is the ardent wish of a large majority of our 
constituents that General Andrew Jackson should succeed Mr. 
Monroe as President of the United States of America, and we 
have no doubt he will receive the undivided support of the State 
of Alabama; wherefore, be it resolved, that the governor of 
this State be, and he is hereby, requested to transmit to the 
governors of each of our sister States, copies of the foregoing 
preamble and resolution. 

In this case, however, the joint resolution was vetoed by 
Governor Pickens, who, in his veto message, after warmly in- 
dorsing the sentiment of the resolutions, gave the following rea- 
sons for his action : 

It is because I believe it is not fairly within the legitimate 
sphere of legislation, and, so far as my knowledge extends, with- 
out any previous example, and would be introductory of 
unnecessary, if not mischievous, matters into our legislative 
deliberations, that I am induced not to add my signature to 
the joint resolutions. 

After the above veto the resolutions were laid on the table, 
and subsequently a resolution was introduced and adopted by 
both houses, requesting the Speaker of the House of Representa- 
tives and the President of the Senate to transmit a copy of the 



48 Readings on Parties and Elections 

resolutions to the executive of each State, and to each of the 
Alabama Senators and Representatives at Washington. 

This method of nomination, which was common in the cam- 
paigns of 1824, 1828 and 1832, continued to exist even after the 
adoption of the national convention in 1832. For instance, in 
January, 1835, Hugh L. White was nominated for the Presidency 
by a joint resolution of the Alabama Legislature ; while as late as 
1842 John C. Calhoun was nominated by the legislatures of 
South Carolina and Georgia as a candidate for the election 
of 1844. But as the national convention system came to 
be better organized, this method of nomination gradually 
disappeared. 

13. Presidential Nominations by State Legislative Caucus. 
Closely akin to the method just described was that of nomina- 
tion of national candidates by a joint caucus of the party mem- 
bers of both branches of a State legislature. The first case of 
actual nomination by this method was the nomination of De- 
Witt Clinton by a caucus of the Republican members of the 
New York Legislature in 181 2. With the commencement of 
the campaign of 1824, it began to be generally adopted, and was 
the commonest mode of nomination during the period of transi- 
tion from the Congressional caucus to the national convention. 
The mode of procedure may perhaps be best illustrated by the 
following example. 

On November 18, 1822, in accordance with a previous notice, 
a meeting of the Republican members of the Senate and House 
of Representatives of the Kentucky Legislature was held in the 
hall of the House of Representatives after the adjournment of 
the two branches. The call for the meeting stated the object to 
be "the consideration of the propriety of recommending to the 
people of the United States some suitable person to fill the office 
of President of the United States after the expiration of the pres- 
ent presidential term." The meeting was organized by the 
choice of William T. Barry as chairman and Thomas Speed as 
secretary. Mr. George Robertson then offered a resolution and 



Development of Party Organization 49 

address, which were unanimously adopted. The resolution read 
as follows : 

Resolved, That Henry Clay, late Speaker of the House of 
Representatives, be recommended as a suitable person to succeed 
James Monroe as president. 

The address which followed the resolution states Kentucky's 
claim to the Presidency on the ground of locality, and then pro- 
ceeded to eulogize her favorite son in the most glowing terms. 

This method of nomination by State legislative caucus, like 
its contemporary official method, continued to exist after 1832, 
but it likewise disappeared with the firm establishment of the 
convention system. 

14. Presidential Nominations by Mixed Conventions. An- 
other method of nominating national candidates in vogue dur- 
ing the transition period was by a convention composed of the 
party members of the legislature, together with delegates from 
those counties or towns not represented in the legislature by 
members belonging to the party holding the convention. A 
good example of this method is to be found in the nomination of 
John Quincy Adams in January, 1823, at a "joint meeting of the 
Republican members of the Massachusetts legislature and of 
Republican delegates from the various towns of the common- 
wealth not represented in the legislature. The mode of pro- 
cedure of such a body was exactly the same as that of the legis- 
lative caucus already described. 

This method, like those previously described, is occasionally 
met with after the general adoption of the convention system. 
For instance, in February, 1843, a convention composed of the 
Whig members of the Virginia Legislature, and of two hundred 
delegates from different parts of the State, was held at Richmond, 
at which resolutions were adopted nominating Henry Clay as the 
Whig candidate for the Presidency, and referring the nomina- 
tion of a candidate for the Vice-Presidency to the national con- 
vention. 



50 Readings on Parties and Elections 

15. Presidential Nominations by State Conventions. Still 
another method of nominating candidates for the Presidency is 
found in the proceedings of a "Jackson" State convention held 
at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, in January, 1828, at which the 
following preamble and resolutions were unanimously adopted : 

Whereas, the Democratic citizens of this commonwealth in ac- 
cordance with the established usages of the party, have delegated 
to this convention the important trust of nominating candidates 
for the presidency and vice-presidency of the United States, to 
be supported at the approaching presidential election: And 
whereas the voice of the Democratic party has been unequivo- 
cally expressed in favor of that illustrious and patriotic citizen, 
Andrew Jackson of Tennessee, as president, and John C. Calhoun 
of South Carolina, as vice-president, 

Resolved, That Andrew Jackson of Tennessee be nominated 
as the Democratic candidate of Pennsylvania for the office of 
president of the United States, — 

Resolved, That John C. Calhoun of South Carolina be nom- 
inated for the office of vice-president of the United States. 

A committee was appointed to draft an address to the "demo- 
cratic republican citizens of Pennsylvania on the subject of the 
approaching election," and in addition a "central committee of 
correspondence" was appointed, and also similar committees of 
every county in the State. A full election ticket was named 
in the Jackson interest. A resolution was then passed that 
each candidate nominated for the office of Presidential 
elector give "a written pledge or assurance" that if elected 
he would vote for the nominees of the convention. In case 
any candidate refused or neglected to give such a pledge, the 
central committee was empowered to substitute some other 
person in his place. The central committee was also em- 
powered to fill all vacancies that might occur. After ordering 
that fifteen thousand copies of the address be printed, — one- 
third of them in the German language, — the convention 
adjourned. 

Even after the adoption of the convention system in national 



Development of Party Organization 51 

politics, the State conventions continued to nominate candi- 
dates for the Presidency, the effect being merely an expres- 
sion of the sentiment of the party in the State. The practice 
of instructing delegates by a resolution of the State 
convention to vote for a certain person or persons at the 
national convention which subsequently arose, and which still 
exists, is apparently a survival of the former system of actual 
nomination. 

16. Presidential Nominations by Public Meetings. One of 
the most interesting features of the campaign of 1824 was the 
almost universal practice of obtaining the preferences of the peo- 
ple as to Presidential candidates at all sorts of public gatherings. 
All over the country mass meetings were held, at which a regular 
ballot was taken, just as at a regular election. At very many of 
these meetings formal resolutions were adopted nominating some 
candidate for the Presidency. For example, in March, 1824, 
such a meeting was held at Fredericksburg, Virginia, at which 
John Quincy Adams was nominated for the Presidency and 
Andrew Jackson for the Vice-Presidency, — a very peculiar 
combination. These meetings were in reality simply meetings 
held to ratify the nomination of candidates who had been pre- 
viously nominated in one or more of the ways already described. 
In other words, they were what we to-day call " rallies," the 
only difference being the formal adoption of nominating 
resolutions. 

17. Reasons for a Change of System. All of the five methods 
of nomination for national offices which have just been described 
could obviously be nothing more than temporary expedients. 
In the first place, all except the State convention had become 
antiquated; and secondly, the first three were unpopular, be- 
cause they were forms of legislative interference which, in the 
case of State nominations, had already been abandoned in many 
of the States, and which, in national politics, had met with a 
most emphatic rebuke in the overthrow of the Congressional 
caucus. 



52 Readings on Parties and Elections 

Again, with the reorganization of political parties after the 
"era of good feeling," and the rapid growth of population, the 
utter inadequacy of any system of State nomination for national 
offices became readily apparent. A national party must have a 
national system of nomination, and the expedient of a convention 
naturally suggested itself. 



III. The Convention and the Direct Primary 

I. THE STRENGTH OF THE CONVENTION SYSTEM l 

A convention furnishes a means of bringing out unknown 
but worthy candidates, discussing the merits of rivals, arousing 
party enthusiasm, giving consideration to all interests to which 
the party appeal is to be made, and perfecting the smooth work- 
ing of the party machinery. At its best, the convention is "a 
school of practical politics." 

Whatever may be said of the present state of this old institu- 
tion, it ought not to be condemned upon superficial and insuffi- 
cient grounds. There can be no doubt that in the course of its 
time-honored existence it has been of inestimable service to this 
country. Its evolution which has already been traced shows 
that the forces which created it were democratic ; that it arose 
as the servant of the people. . . 

As in the past our nominating institutions have conformed to 
the times and the tenor of the people, so may the convention 
system of to-day be changed or wholly abolished. The mere 
fact of its long existence does not argue for continued life. . . 

Theoretically the convention system is perfect. It passes 
the highest test of a political institution in a democratic com- 
munity. It admits of the purest application of the principle 
of representation or delegated authority. Step by step the voice 
of each individual voter can, in theory, be transmitted from 
delegate to delegate until finally it finds its perfect expression 
in the legislature, the executive, or the judiciary. The nearest 

1 Meyer, E. C, Nominating Systems. Madison, Wisconsin, 1902 ; pp. 
43-54. 

53 



54 Readings on Parties and Elections 

approach to such ideal conditions of operation was reached by 
the convention system during its early days. 

As a party institution, the convention once occupied the high- 
est and most important position. When so conducted as to 
command the confidence and respect of the party, it was the 
foundation of party success. Within it there sprang up the cen- 
tral moving figures of the campaign. It contributed to bind 
party elements firmly together, and to inspire enthusiastic party 
life, and thereby performed a valuable service in the cause of 
government. . . 

The convention was the foundation of party success, because 
it furnished an excellent opportunity for the perfection of party 
organization, as well as for the prosecution of a vigorous cam- 
paign, in which all party forces were formed in line and operated 
with united power for a common end. It afforded an excellent 
opportunity for the estimation of a party's strength, for it was 
composed of men from every locality, and from every part of 
the State. Usually these were representative men, fully cogni- 
zant of party conditions in their home community. Through 
their conference the standing and fortunes of the party were 
ascertained, and the party policy shaped accordingly. 

It also afforded opportunity for the estimation of a candi- 
date's real popularity. Fatal mistakes were sometimes avoided 
by the timely substitution of new nominees for intended candi- 
dates, whose standing with the party masses had been misjudged. 
A party to be successful must offer to the public, men who will 
be well supported, and upon whom the people are willing to 
bestow the title of a public servant. Such candidates could 
well be chosen in a gathering of party men, representing all geo- 
graphical areas, all interests, and all factions covered by the 
election. 

It has also happened that in conventions an " undiscovered " 
candidate of good parts and popular quality was successfully 
advertised and came before the electorate in time to win success 
for the party. A capable man, who was unknown to the mass of 



The Convention and the Direct Primary 55 

party voters, and who might possibly have remained unknown 
too long to be of service to his party, has been accidentally so 
discovered and nominated, and his party and the public well 
served by him. 

Likewise, also, men of special merit have found in the meetings 
of delegates fortunate opportunities for acquiring prominence 
without great loss of time or money. To these time is often 
more important than money. The necessary personal adver- 
tising required for a preliminary canvass, aside from its disagree- 
able features, would have consumed a forbidding amount of time 
if done with sufficient thoroughness to insure a nomination ; while 
many a young man of ability would have found the drain upon 
his finances in conducting a protracted personal campaign too 
severe to enable him to win the day for himself in the usual way. 

A harmonious party convention has always presented excel- 
lent opportunities for arousing party enthusiasm. Under such 
conditions partisan meets partisan, speeches are made and heard, 
the party enthusiasm of the North greets that of the South, the 
party cry of the West mingles with that of the East, party spirit 
rises to its height, and inspires its color bearers to act their best. 
Not only would party fires flame up in such conventions, but 
each of the delegates returning to his community warmed with 
the spirit of party enthusiasm, would reinforce the local cam- 
paign with renewed vigor, and would rally his wavering friends 
to freshened efforts and stronger party affiliations. 

The convention at its best, has also afforded favorable op- 
portunity for the conciliation of party factions. Unity within 
a party is absolutely necessary for success, unless the minority 
parties are unusually weak. This unity has always been diffi- 
cult to maintain. It is natural that party leaders should differ 
in their conceptions of what would be the best party policies. 
Each stands at the helm of the party in his own locality, and has 
his own little band of followers. Each develops his ideas in the 
light of his home, and rallies to his standard the partisan friends 
of the neighborhood. Some day they must clash. That day 



56 Readings on Parties and Elections 

comes with the opening of the preliminary campaign. The 
party platform must be formulated, and the party candidates 
selected. Differences must be adjusted and compromises must 
be made. The convention when assembled and conducted as a 
deliberative body controlled by its best elements for the greatest 
good, would be an ideal place for settling such differences, dimin- 
ishing the chances of party bolting, because the consummated 
conciliation would be a general one, effected in the presence of 
the main party spirits, and hence, as a rule, binding and abiding. 

The ideal convention would also enable the selection of repre- 
sentative men who would receive the most general support of 
the party, because proper emphasis could be placed upon the 
following important elements of party success: geographical 
distribution of the candidates; their nationality; their social 
standing ; the class represented ; the commercial, industrial, or 
agricultural interests, etc., that they stood for; the shades of 
political ideas entertained, — all these matters could be duly 
considered. 

Such a convention would be the place where the party plat- 
form could well be formulated. It would be a deliberative and 
thoroughly representative body, where every locality, every fac- 
tion, every class, and every interest would find a voice in the 
meeting. It would be a decidedly up-to-date body. Its dele- 
gates would have been but shortly elected, and in a position to 
define party issues intelligently. The platform which they 
framed would have the general confidence of the party, and oper- 
ate as a binding element on dissatisfied members. 

The convention thus, in theory, lies at the foundation of party 
success. It perfects party organization, measures its strength, 
conciliates its factions, defines its issues, selects its candidates, 
and arouses enthusiasm. For these many reasons its advocates 
still regard it as a most valuable instrument in the hands of the 
party. . . 

In its best days the convention was also a school of practical 
politics. In it the youth of the rising generation, who were to 



The Convention and the Direct Primary . 57 

control the destinies of the Nation, were taught the earlier and 
simpler lessons of practical politics. They learned to know the 
constitution and operation of our nominating machinery, and 
received an insight into the inner workings of party politics. 
Such experience cannot but prove of great worth to men who in 
the future assume public leadership and occupy positions of 
importance in the public service. 

2. THE CORRUPT CONVENTION * 

Any indirect method of representation destroys responsi- 
bility. The management of caucuses and conventions has be- 
come so complicated that they are practically removed from 
popular control and fall into the hands of professional poli- 
ticians. 

The convention had been established as the forum of the people, 
where they should try out the merits of the men offered as candi- 
dates and make their final choice. With its caucus representa- 
tion, coming up from each township and ward in every county, 
where the individual might attend and cast his vote in selection 
of some one who should represent him, it had all the form and 
appearance of a representative democracy. In practice too it 
had been of real service to the people, as a medium through which 
to express their will. But the day had long passed, since the 
plain citizen learned, that the management of caucuses and con- 
ventions had been taken charge of by gentlemen trained to the 
work. In the years of phenomenal material development, while 
he had been occupied with business affairs, absorbed in his pro- 
fession, working long hours in the field and factory, when the 
issues had seemed to him important in a certain sense, but not 
so deeply, vitally important as when they concerned the 
fate of government itself — during these years when he had at- 
tended to his private affairs and omitted his public duties — 

1 Lafollette, R. M., Primary Elections. Address delivered before Michi- 
gan University, Ann Arbor, Michigan, March 12, 1898. 



58 Readings on Parties and Elections 

a new kind of business had been established. The management 
of caucuses and conventions had acquired the importance of a 
profession. Well distributed over the state skilled men served 
in this employment constantly. The plain citizen had met these 
gentlemen in the caucuses and conventions, and long ago dis- 
covered it was useless to contest with them. They are parts of 
an organization, select, compact, disciplined. They receive their 
orders without question and execute them without fear. They 
are parts of the political machine. They have been able to 
subvert the caucus and convention and substitute the dictates of 
the machine for the will of the people. It was not so difficult a 
task. It required money, the constant co-operation of a few 
quick minded men, ready of speech, possessed of some knowledge 
of parliamentary law, a programme carefully worked out in ad- 
vance and a conscience that sleeps while its owner wakes. The 
masters of commerce and trade supplied the money. The money 
secured the men. The rest was easy. 

Well might they laugh at the Australian ballot. Not to be 
obliged to buy an election, simplified matters for them. Well 
might they say: "Elect whomsoever you will, if we make the 
nominations." It could not fail to come sooner or later. The 
very plan of the caucus and convention invited it. 

Consider the proceedings to nominate candidates for office, 
in a political convention even at the best. The delegates are 
first chosen in a caucus with little or no opportunity for well 
considered action. No permanent record of its proceedings is 
preserved. Only a limited number of those who attend, desire 
to spend the time and money to make a journey to the place, 
where will be held the convention, not to make nominations, 
but to elect another set of delegates to attend upon another con- 
vention where nominations are to be made. In this intermedi- 
ate convention the work is necessarily done in haste, the service 
is very brief. The proceedings of the delegates composing this 
convention find no fixed place in political history. 

The delegates elected to attend upon the nominating conven- 



The Convention and the Direct Primary 59 

tion are again confronted with the expenditure of a considerable 
sum of money and a still further contribution of time to make a 
journey to the place of holding the final or nominating conven- 
tion. The men willing to undertake this service must do so 
either from pure loyalty to party, devotion to the interest of 
some candidate or because they personally aspire to receive some 
political preferment, and regard the time and money spent in 
the light of a political investment. 

Mark, now, what has transpired ! The voter has transferred 
his interest to the keeping of the delegate in the caucus. He 
cannot hope that his agent will reflect his convictions in all their 
original strength. He must expect them to be colored in a 
measure, by the agent's own opinions. But when the caucus 
delegate, as a member of the intermediate convention, has again 
transferred the interest of the voter committed to him in the 
caucus, to delegates who have been elected to attend the nomi- 
nating convention — doubtless many or all of them total strangers 
to him personally — to be again colored by the personal views and 
prejudices of these sub-agents, the convictions of the plain citi- 
zen, the voter back of the original agent and the sub-agents 
have by this time little more of substance than the dream of a 
dream. With every transfer of this delegated power, responsi- 
bility has weakened until when finally it has made its winding 
journey to the nominating convention, responsibility to the voter 
has been lost on the way. 

On rare occasions under special provocation the community 
may arise and overwhelm the minions of the machine in the cau- 
cus. Brief victory ! Between the precinct caucus and the in- 
termediate convention, the intermediate convention and the 
nominating convention, are countless pitfalls for the unwary 
delegate, countless temptations to try his constancy, conven- 
ient shifts and subterfuges for him to cover his want of fidelity. 
In short it is easy for him to blunder, it is easy for him to be- 
tray the voter behind him, and it is next to impossible to fasten 
responsibility upon him for anything he may do. 



60 Readings on Parties and Elections 

But let us follow this perversion of representative government 
to the very end. The time arrives for the meeting of the nomi- 
nating convention. The delegates elected by the intermediate 
convention go from every county, to the place designated by the 
State Central committee, nominally the supreme authority of 
the party. The gathering of delegates, of prominent politicians, 
of candidates and the friends of candidates, augmented by the 
multitude which contest always attracts, crowd the rooms and 
corridors of the hotels, and the streets of the city. Political 
"workers," not elected as delegates, many of whom indeed have 
been defeated as delegates in the local caucus and intermediate 
convention, arrive early and take active part in the real work of 
the nominating convention. Though they may have been re- 
jected as untrustworthy representatives of the voters at home, 
they frequently exercise a controlling influence upon the action 
of the nominating convention, thus defeating the will of the ma- 
jority that defeated them as delegates. They plunge at once 
into the contest and the commotion increases with their onset. 
Upon all sides men are hurrying to and fro. Glib talkers are 
heard in heated discussion. Others are quietly moving through 
the crowd, dropping significant remarks here and there, setting 
on certain ones to talk, starting rumors and roorbacks, loosening 
the tongue of scandal and falsehood, questioning, doubting, deal- 
ing in hints and innuendoes, raising false issues against one candi- 
date, asserting that there is a division in the support of another, 
that it is reported that another has given up the contest and with- 
drawn, that another would be bolted by the Germans or Irish or 
Norwegians if nominated, and so on and on to the end of evil 
invention. Every hour the excitement increases. Investiga- 
tion is baffled. Explanations are of no avail. There is no 
chance for argument. The truth is discounted. Statements 
are as good as facts. 

The time approaches when the convention will meet. Away 
in some retired room behind locked doors the masters of the ma- 
chine sit in quiet conference. They have issued their orders to 



The Convention and the Direct Primary 61 

those in nominal control. The programme of the convention is 
all prepared. The temporary and permanent chairmen have 
been " elected" in advance, notified weeks ago and are present, 
each with an impromptu speech of acceptance in his little satchel. 
These men have been selected by the masters of the machine 
with considerate judgment. There will be no mistakes made. 
Men designated in advance will be recognized by the chairman 
for all important motions at the "right time." All troublesome 
points of order will be promptly overruled. All motions will be 
decided in the "right way." These precautions have been found 
necessary even in the best governed machine conventions, for 
revolt against the rule of the machine is sometimes to be expected 
and always provided against. Nothing is overlooked here. 
There is no haste, no confusion. In the rooms of the delegates, 
in the wide corridors of the hotel below, out upon the streets of 
the city, the excited mass may push and surge, parry and thrust, 
accuse and deny, hoot and cheer, but in this quiet corner all is 
harmonious and peaceful. And it is here that the work of the 
convention is being performed, here that the combinations are 
effected, here that the deals, and bargains, and trades, and 
pledges, and promises of appointment, are being made, that will 
settle all the business of the convention, at the appointed time. 

Finally all is in readiness, the hour is at hand. The bands 
play. The delegations take their places under the waving ban- 
ners, in the great convention hall. Thousands of spectators 
look down upon the scene from the lofty galleries. At last order 
and quiet prevails, but it is the tense quiet of suppressed excite- 
ment. The nerves are tingling, the pulses bounding. It is a 
powder magazine of powerfully restrained human emotions, a 
spark, a gesture, a word, and an explosion follows. 

The nominating speeches are made. With each presentation 
the supporting delegates cheer and applaud and stamp and wave 
fans and flags in a furious demonstration of endorsement. The 
convention becomes a scene of wild disorder. Men of serious 
and dignified deportment in life clamber over seats and rush 



62 Readings on Parties and Elections 

back and forth, frantically shouting the names of their favorite 
candidates, until they finally cease from sheer exhaustion. 

And this is a deliberative body of American citizens, engaged 
in the discharge of the gravest duty which can ever be committed 
to men, under a representative form of government ! Immortal 
fathers who founded this republic ! Let us believe that in the 
providence of God your eyes are veiled from this modern 
method of nominating candidates for the high trust of public 
service. 

With the speech making at an end the balloting begins, but 
there is no lull in the storm. The announcement of the votes of 
each delegation is greeted with applause from time to time, ris- 
ing above the confusion of the canvass carried on by the more 
active members of the convention as they rush their workers from 
one delegation to another in eager quest for votes. The result 
of the ballot when declared, if not final, is the occasion for a 
storm of cheers from the adherents of the leading candidates. 
Then the balloting goes forward again. 

The lightness of the obligation of the delegate, to the voters 
he represents, now becomes manifest. Many who have with- 
stood the blandishments and temptations of the canvass since 
their arrival, having recorded a vote for the choice of their con- 
stituencies, hope now to be able to do something for themselves, 
in the way of political preferment and rush wildly for the "loaded 
wagon." This is usually followed by a stampede which closes 
the contest and reveals the inherent weakness of a plan of repre- 
sentation wholly without responsibility. 

The work of the convention is ended. The masters of the 
machine have had their way. The minority from their quiet 
corner in the hotel have ruled the great majority of the plain 
citizens of the state. The men named as candidates are the 
servants of the minority. They know their masters. They 
will serve them well. There may be anger. There may be 
disintegration threatened in the party. But the machine trusts 
to the white heat of the campaign to fuse the fragments and win 



The Convention and the Direct Primary 63 

the day. It has succeeded many times and they depend on high 
partisan feeling, strong devotion to party principles, to carry 
the ticket through. What though the voters do not like the 
candidates, they will surely prefer them to the candidates of the 
other party who have been nominated by the same methods. 

This then is the work of the modern caucus and convention. 
No candid man will dispute the facts, or claim that the portrayal 
too strongly presents the defects, or assert that the more debas- 
ing practices are even hinted at. And this is the practical result 
of a century of effort in self-government. In this land of the 
free, dedicated to the principles of democracy, climbing by the 
caucus and the convention, the machine has mounted to power in 
nearly every state of the Union. 

It controls in making the laws. It controls in executing the 
laws. It prostitutes the civil service and does not spare even 
the charitable and penal institutions of the state. It increases 
the burdens of taxation upon the homes and finds an easy way 
to allow some corporations to go untaxed. 

This is government by the caucus and convention. It is not 
representative government. It is not government by the people. 



3. WEAKNESSES OF THE CONVENTION SYSTEM 1 

The character of its membership, the complexity of the 
system, the use of proxies, the manipulations of credentials, log- 
rolling, and bribery combine to defeat the object of the conven- 
tion — the representation of the popular will. 

We may first study the evils which surround the convention 
as a result of external corrupting influences. They vary widely 
with the localities. They depend upon the activity of the 
"machine" politician, and the delegates who are to be "worked." 
Three classes of delegates may be distinguished in conventions : 

1 Meyer, E. C, Nominating Systems. Madison, Wisconsin, 1902 ; p. 57, 
et seq. 



64 Readings on Parties and Elections 

the " fixed" delegates who represent the "machine-controlled" 
primaries, and who are found to a greater or less extent in most 
of the conventions held in this country ; the faithful and inde- 
pendent delegates of a staunch and incorruptible character, 
who faithfully express the wishes of their constituents, and who 
would do so under any conditions ; and between these extremes, 
a wavering class, which is more or less susceptible to corrupt in- 
fluences. In its ranks the havoc of evil runs riot. Its presence 
makes the activity of the professional politician profitable 
beyond the confines of the primary. If he has failed at the 
latter another opportunity presents itself at the convention. 
If the "machine" lacks a sufficient number of adherents to con- 
trol the nominations at which it aims, there is still a chance to 
win over these "workable" delegates before the convention has 
performed its functions. 

The political worker is aided in his schemes of bribery and 
corruption by the complexity of the convention system. The 
multiplicity of offices to be filled, and the variety of their grades, 
including those of the town, city, county, State, and Nation, 
each of which requires its own particular set of conventions, has 
given rise to a bewildering intricacy in our nominating institu- 
tions. In some cases delegates to higher conventions are selected 
by delegates to lower conventions. All this intricacy, which 
confuses the average voter, makes proper instruction almost 
impossible, lessens the responsibility of the delegates, and eases 
the way for the professional politician who has thoroughly mas- 
tered its details, and enables him to manipulate his forces suc- 
cessfully. 

The complexity of the system also gives rise to a second advan- 
tage for the "boss" and the ring-leader. The numerous con- 
ventions require a number of delegates so large that it is difficult 
to find a sufficient number of good men who are willing to act. 
Successful business men, or professional men, generally refuse to 
act because of lack of time, while capable men of leisure fre- 
quently refuse upon the ground that it is humiliating and undig- 



The Convention and the Direct Primary 65 

nified to attend a convention dominated by the "machine," and 
there find the wishes of one's constituents entirely ignored. 
Hence a class of fickle politicians who spend their time in politics 
for what they can get out of it, are likely to find their way into 
the convention halls, where they constitute plastic material in 
the hands of the deputed convention workers of the "machine." 

The custom of sending proxies is also fraught with much evil 
in that it removes the responsibility of the original delegate to 
his constituents. He may yield his seat in the convention to 
his proxy, to escape disagreeable business, or for one pretense or 
another allow him to take his place. The "machine" may by 
contrivances and intrigues, aid in the process, especially if the 
proxy is already " fixed." It is a usual subterfuge to head a dele- 
gate ticket with the name of a man of known probity, and per- 
haps even to fill out the list with men of this character, when it 
is certain that these men will not serve, and that unknown alter- 
nates or proxies, subservient to the "bosses," will sit in the con- 
vention. Thus it happens that the practice of proxyship plays 
right into the hands of the professional politicians. 

The "machine-controlled" committee of credentials is also 
a source of common and glaring frauds in conventions. It is a 
means by which the first class of delegates, the staunch and true 
and "unworkable" representatives of the people, are prevented 
from taking their seats in the convention upon one pretense or 
another, while the "machine" proxies are put in their places. 

Similar grave results may proceed from the practice of instruc- 
tion for second choice, for it also presents the opportunity of 
dropping the candidate of first choice upon one plea or another, 
if "trading" or "logrolling" accompanied by personal advan- 
tage should make this expedient. Every practice of this kind 
which increases the freedom of the delegates, weakens the force 
of their instructions, and increases the possibility of "machine" 
control. 

Since considerable time usually elapses between the selection 
of the delegates and the assembly of the convention, the chances 



66 Readings on Parties and Elections 

to defeat the wishes of the people are only too ample. The 
pressure that is brought to bear upon delegates through personal 
influences, political prestige, use of money, threat, and cunning 
duplicity, is tremendous and well-nigh irresistible, unless indeed 
the heart and mind are firmly fixed beforehand. . . 

The wavering delegate who hesitates to yield himself to these 
personal considerations, is strengthened in his wrongful tenden- 
cies, as already suggested, by the fact of indefinite or uncertain 
instructions, or their total absence. Even though the voter 
knew in each particular instance just what candidate he wished 
to vote for, and what delegate he must support to do so, he would 
still be involved in perplexities occasioned by the multitude of 
offices to be filled in some cases by each convention. He might 
be able to make up a ticket of delegates who would all be favor- 
able to any one of the candidates he desires to see nominated, 
but such is the variety of opinions that he would find it impos- 
sible to name a list of delegates who would be unanimously fa- 
vorable to his choice for every one of a number of offices. To 
this must be added the almost boundless confusion which would 
result should he endeavor to instruct each delegate as to first 
and second choice. Hence it would be quite impossible for him 
to charge each delegate with definite instructions as to each 
candidate to be nominated. Only very general instructions pro- 
ceeding on a party basis are possible. . . 

These inherent weaknesses of the convention system have 
been the cause of its decline. Under the influences of the many 
corrupting forces which ever play in politics, it has gradually 
degenerated. Its representative structure has been broken 
down, and upon its ruins there has been reared a new and des- 
potic institution dominated by an unscrupulous " machine "that 
has forced its way into party leadership, and falsely presumes to 
act in the interests of its members. 



The Convention and the Direct Primary 67 

4. NONPARTISAN MUNICIPAL PRIMARY ELECTIONS 1 

Municipal elections should turn on local issues. To bring 
this about, many states have adopted for their cities schemes 
of elections intended to remove the national parties from the 
choice of local officials. The following is an example. 

Sec. 5. Candidates to be voted for at all general municipal 
elections at which a mayor and four councilmen are to be elected 
under the provisions of this act shall be nominated by a primary 
election, and no other names shall be placed upon the general 
ballot except those selected in the manner hereinafter prescribed. 
The primary election for such nomination shall be held on the 
second Monday preceding the general municipal election. The 
judges of election appointed for the general municipal election 
shall be the judges of the primary election, and it shall be held 
at the same place, so far as possible, and the polls shall be opened 
and closed at the same hours, with the same clerks as are re- 
quired for said general municipal election. 

Any person desiring to become a candidate for mayor or coun- 
cilman shall, at least ten days prior to said primary election, 
file with the said clerk a statement of such candidacy, in sub- 
stantially the following form. 
State of Iowa, County, — ss. 

I ( ) being first duly sworn, say that I reside 

at street, city of county 

of State of Iowa ; that I am a qualified voter therein ; 

that I am a candidate for nomination to the office of (mayor or 
councilman) to be voted upon at the primary election to be held 

in the Monday of 19 . . 

and I hereby request that my name be printed upon the official 
primary ballot for nomination by such primary election for such 
office. 

(Signed) 

Subscribed and sworn to (or affirmed) before me by , 

on this day of 19 . . 

(Signed). 
1 Laws of Iowa, Chap. 48; 1907 (excerpt). 



68 Readings on Parties and Elections 

and shall at the same time file therewith the petition of at least 
twenty-five qualified voters requesting such candidacy. Each 
petition shall be verified by one or more persons as to the quali- 
fications and residence, with street number, of each of the persons 
so signing the said petition, and the said petition shall be in sub- 
stantially the following form : 

PETITION ACCOMPANYING NOMINATION STATEMENT 

The undersigned, duly qualified electors of the city of ... . 
. . . ., and residing at the places set opposite our respective 
names hereto, do hereby request that the name of (name of candi- 
date) be placed on the ballot as a candidate for nomination for 
(name of office) at the primary election to be held in such city on 

the Monday of , 19 

We further state that we know him to be a qualified elector of 
said city and a man of good moral character and qualified in our 
judgment for the duties of such office. 



Names of Qualified Electors 



Number 



Streets 



Immediately upon the expiration of the time of filing the state- 
ments and petitions for candidacies, the said city clerk shall cause 
to be published for three successive days in all the daily news- 
papers in the city, in proper form, the names of the persons as 
they are to appear upon the primary ballots, and if there be no 
daily newspaper, then in two issues of any other newspapers that 
may be published in said city ; and the said clerk shall thereupon 
cause the primary ballots to be printed, authenticated with a 
facsimile of his signature. Upon the said ballot the names of 
the candidates for mayor, arranged alphabetically, shall first 
be placed, with a square at the left of each name, and immedi- 



The Convention and the Direct Primary 69 

ately below the words, "Vote for one." Following these names, 
likewise arranged in alphabetical order, shall appear the names 
of the candidates for councilmen, with a square at the left of 
each name and below the names of such candidates shall appear 
the words, "Vote for four." The ballots shall be printed upon 
plain, substantial white paper, and shall be headed: 

CANDIDATES FOR NOMINATION FOR MAYOR 

AND COUNCILMEN OF . . ' CITY 

AT THE PRIMARY ELECTION 

but shall have no party designation or mark whatever. The 
ballots shall be in substantially the following form : 

(Place a cross in the square preceding the names of the parties 
you favor as candidates for the respective positions.) 

OFFICIAL PRIMARY BALLOT 

CANDIDATE FOR NOMINATION FOR MAYOR 

AND COUNCILMEN OF ... . CITY AT THE 

PRIMARY ELECTION 

For Mayor 

□ (Name of Candidate.) 

(Vote for one.) 

For Councilman 

□ (Name of Candidate.) 

(Vote for four.) 

Official ballot attest : 
(Signature) 



City Clerk. 

Having caused said ballots to be printed, the said city clerk 
shall cause to be delivered at each polling place a number of said 
ballots equal to twice the number of votes cast in such polling 
precinct at the last general municipal election for mayor. The 



70 Readings on Parties and Elections 

persons who are qualified to vote at the general municipal elec- 
tion shall be qualified to vote at such primary election, and chal- 
lenges can be made by not more than two persons, to be ap- 
pointed at the time of opening the polls by the judges of election ; 
and the law applicable to challenges at a general municipal elec- 
tion shall be applicable to challenges made at such primary elec- 
tion. Judges of election shall, immediately upon the closing of 
the polls, count the ballots and ascertain the number of votes 
cast in such precinct for each of the candidates, and make re- 
turn thereof to the city clerk, upon proper blanks to be furnished 
by the said clerk, within six hours of the closing of the polls. On 
the day following the said primary election the said city clerk 
shall canvass said returns so received from all the polling pre- 
cincts, and shall make and publish in all the newspapers of said 
city at least once, the result thereof. Said canvass by the city 
clerk shall be publicly made. The two candidates receiving the 
highest number of votes for mayor shall be the candidates and 
the only candidates whose names shall be placed upon the ballot 
for mayor at the next succeeding general municipal election, 
and the eight candidates receiving the highest number of votes 
for councilman, or all such candidates if less, than eight, shall be 
the candidates and the only candidates whose names shall be 
placed upon the ballot for councilman at such municipal election. 
All electors of cities under this act who by the laws governing 
cities of the first class and cities acting under special charter 
would be entitled to vote for the election of officers at any gen- 
eral municipal election in such cities, shall be qualified to vote 
at all elections under this act; and the ballot at such general 
municipal election shall be in the same general form as for such 
primary election, so far as applicable, and in all elections in such 
city the election precincts, voting places, methods of conducting 
election, canvassing the votes and announcing the results, shall 
be the same as by law provided for election of officers in such 
cities, so far as the same are applicable and not inconsistent with 
the provisions of this act. 



The Convention and the Direct Primary 71 

5. LEGISLATION NEEDED TO SUPPLEMENT PRIMARY ELECTION 

LAWS 1 

Though the Primary Election System has made rapid strides 
in replacing the convention, there are still many points upon 
which even its best friends are disappointed in its working. 
Some of the improvements most often urged are here discussed. 

There can be little doubt that the direct primary system will 
continue to progress, supplanting the convention method, until 
ultimately it covers the whole group of states. The direct pri- 
mary system promises popular control of the nominating machin- 
ery, and the overthrow and expulsion of the party boss. It 
promises to drive out oligarchy or autocracy, and to introduce 
democracy into the party system. Upon this promise a desperate 
political constituency relies. Whether all the results depicted 
by the advocates of the system will actually follow, there may 
be serious doubt. But its chief opponents have been men who 
failed to take a broad view of the political field, and their mo- 
tives and their arguments have not been taken seriously by the 
people. Their fear that party organization might be destroyed 
has been construed as apprehension that certain holders of power 
might be displaced under the new system. Monstrous abuses 
have arisen under the convention system and whether or not 
the direct primary can perform all that its advocates promise, 
there can be little question that the people of the United States 
are disposed to give it a fair trial and will undertake the experi- 
ment without much further delay. 

A more serious problem is presented by the relation between 
the direct primary and the system of nomination by petition 
only. In elections where it is desirable to separate as far as 
possible national and local issues, there are reasons why the direct 
primary may not be the most practicable system. No matter 

1 Merriam, C. E., Primary Elections. University of Chicago Press, 1908; 
pp. 163-176. 



J2 Readings on Parties and Elections 

what the nominating system may be, if it is a party system, par- 
tisan politics are thrust upon the electorate and argument upon 
national issues is almost inevitable. Party primaries and non- 
partisan elections do not harmonize, and are, in fact, mutually 
exclusive. The direct primary seems, therefore, to emphasize 
the national party in local politics and the continuance of the 
well-known evils that have heretofore accompanied that system 
in our American cities. 

This was well stated by Mr. Walter Fisher when he declared, 
in an address before the Chicago Charter Convention in 1907 : 

You cannot, by any possibility, successfully operate a party 
which is organized on national and state lines, and fit that party 
to a municipal election. It never has been done, and it never 
will be*done. The lines of cleavage of the different parties are dif- 
ferent. The lines upon which they are agreed in national and 
state elections are not the lines governing the municipal election. 

Nomination by petition only would render party choices, as 
such, impossible. It would be possible, however, for a party to 
hold an informal convention, nominate its candidates, and place 
them upon the ballot by the petition process. But the party 
circle, column, and designation would no longer appear upon the 
ballot. The nominees could have only such advantages as the 
prestige of choice by party leaders might carry with it, and al- 
legiance of the mass of the party voters would not be so confi- 
dently demanded or so easily secured. 

On the other hand, the legal protection of the nominating pro- 
cess would be totally destroyed, and, if nominations actually 
were made by parties, there would be no legal guaranty of an 
orderly process. If it should turn out that nominations were 
actually made by a party boss, the net result would be the de- 
struction of the safeguards that have been built up by forty 
years of primary legislation. So far as cities are concerned, then, 
the question involved is whether the greater advantage lies with 
the direct primary or with the elimination of legally regulated 
party nominations. 



The Convention and the Direct Primary 73 

A primary law should always leave the city the right to choose 
either the direct nominating system or nomination by petition, 
and if the latter is adopted the plan of permitting a preliminary 
election for the purpose of choosing two candidates for each 
office is worthy of careful trial. In the choice of educational 
and judicial officers, nomination by petition only presents pos- 
sibilities worthy of very serious consideration, and in the case of 
school officers is already in use in several places. 

A study of primary election legislation shows that the desired 
results cannot be obtained until other and important political 
changes have been made. Unless primary laws are accompanied 
or followed by other developments of the political situation, 
comparatively little will result from the movement. No friend 
of direct nomination should indulge the pleasant dream that the 
adoption of a law providing for such a system will, of itself, act 
as a cure for all the present-day party evils. Disillusionment 
and discouragement are certain to follow in the wake of any cam- 
paign conducted on such a theory. It is necessary to understand 
that the political conditions are far too serious and far too com- 
plicated to be cured by so simple a specific. 

In the first place, it is not likely that the direct nominating 
system will achieve its full results until the number of elective 
officers is materially reduced. Where thirty or forty offices are 
to be filled at one primary, it is not probable that an intelligent 
choice will be made from the great number of candidates pre- 
sented. The variety of qualifications required for the several 
offices, the multiplicity of candidates clamoring for recognition, 
the obscurity of many of these candidates, the possibility of 
"deals" and "slates," make the likelihood of proper selection 
somewhat remote. It is not probable that the result will be any 
worse than that obtained under the convention system, but, on 
the other hand, it is not likely to be very much better in the case 
of the minor offices. 

The reduction of the number of elective offices is not undemo- 
cratic, as might perhaps be charged, but is, on the contrary, cal- 



74 Readings on Parties and Elections 

culated to give the people more complete control over their own 
government. To provide for popular choice of a large number of 
officers does not increase, but, quite the contrary, diminishes 
their power. As was said in the Federalist : 

The countenance of the government may become more demo- 
cratic ; but the soul that animates it will be more oligarchic. 
The machine will be enlarged, but the fewer, and often the more 
secret, will be the springs by which its motions are directed. 

A great array of elective public offices means control by the 
few rather than by the many. Amenability to popular control 
will be better secured by reducing the number of offices, so that 
the requirements of the candidates for each such position may 
be carefully scrutinized, and the most intelligent choice be made. 

This simplification of the machinery of government may most 
easily be made by eliminating administrative offices from the 
elective list. There can be no good reason why such officers as 
auditor, engineer, and surveyor, should be elective. An auditor 
must be accurate and honest, and there is no such thing as Re- 
publican auditing or Democratic auditing. Nor is there a Re- 
publican way, or a Democratic way, or a Prohibitionist way of 
administering the office of engineer. Certainly there can be no 
form of surveying that could be characterized as Socialistic or 
Democratic or Republican. 

The true principle is that the people should choose all officers 
concerned with the formulation of public policies. They need 
not choose men engaged in the carrying out of policies. Policy- 
framing or legislation is a matter upon which there may be dif- 
ferences of opinion, and men intrusted with the work of drawing 
up such plans must be elected by, and be immediately respon- 
sible to, the people. Regarding the execution of policies once 
enacted into law, there is less room for difference of opinion. 
The making of law is partisan, but the enforcement of law should 
be non-partisan. Laws should not be administered in a partisan 
way, but efficiently and justly. Administration requires tech- 



The Convention and the Direct Primary 75 

nical skill, and partisanship is destructive to its best 
development. 

If any administrative offices are to be selected by popular 
vote, the number should be confined to the chief executive offi- 
cers, such as the mayor and the governor. If these officers are 
chosen by the people and given the duty of selecting and super- 
vising other public servants on the administrative staff, the re- 
sult is certain to be a higher degree of popular control than is 
now generally secured. This principle has been established in 
the federal government from the beginning, is now being adopted 
in our municipal governments, and few new elective offices are 
being provided in state and county government. We are com- 
ing to realize that what is needed is popular control over policies, 
with non-partisan, skilled, and permanent administration of 
these policies. While in London in 1907, 1 was greatly interested 
to see that, although the Moderate party in the London County 
Council had just won a sweeping victory, which placed it in 
power for the first time in sixteen years, no changes were made 
in the administration. The offices and committees of the Coun- 
cil were reorganized to give the victorious party the majority 
necessary to execute its policies, but the public servants whose 
duty it is to execute the policy of the Council remained un- 
disturbed. 

Such a change may be denounced as undemocratic in spirit 
and tendency, but on second thought it will be seen that instead 
of weakening popular control over government the result will be 
to strengthen that control. A system that imposes upon the 
electorate the choice of a mass of officials strengthens the hands 
of partisan or private interests at the expense of the public. 
With a smaller number of elective officers, the results obtained 
under the direct primary system would be far more satisfactory 
than they can be under existing conditions. Public attention 
could be focused upon a few offices and a few candidates with 
better prospects than at present for the ehmination of the unde- 
sirable and the survival of the fittest. Until this is brought 



j6 Readings on Parties and Elections 

about, the success of the direct nominating system must be seri- 
ously menaced. 

Another essential change is the return to the original form of 
the Australian ballot. The party emblem, the party circle, and 
the party column have nothing to do with the Australian ballot, 
and were engrafted on the system by American legislatures. In 
adopting the system, secrecy of the ballot was secured, but the 
party obtained the advantage of arranging party candidates in 
columns and permitting the voter to select a list of candidates 
by marking in the party circle. This mechanical arrangement 
places a premium upon undiscriminating voting, and often re- 
sults in the 'election of unworthy and unfit candidates by sheer 
advantage of position upon the ballot. If the head of the ticket 
is elected, the others are likely to be carried along with the leader, 
regardless of their own merits. Fortunately this plan has not 
been applied to the conduct of nominating elections, where vot- 
ing an organization slate with one mark might have worked great 
damage ; but the fact that this practice prevails in the regular 
elections throws its shadow back over the primaries. The 
knowledge that candidates, when nominated, will be placed under 
the protection of the emblem or the circle, makes the party, es- 
pecially in districts where it is strongly in the majority, less care- 
ful in its choice of candidates than would otherwise be the case. 
It is only human nature to be less studious of the public wishes 
in a situation where a nomination is equivalent to an election, 
and where defeat even of the unworthy is a remote possibility. 
Ballot reform is, therefore, a necessary accompaniment of pri- 
mary reform. The ballot in the regular election should be made 
up in the same form as the ballot in the primary election, with 
the party designation placed after the name of the candidate. 

Another requisite to the complete success of the direct nomi- 
nating plan is the further extension and enforcement of the merit 
system. As long as an army of officials can be thrown into the 
field in support of a particular " slate," it will be difficult for the 
candidate, not so supported, to succeed. The odds are too 



The Convention and the Direct Primary 77 

greatly in favor of the regular army against the unorganized and 
undisciplined volunteers. Occasionally victory may perch on 
the banners of the straggling group of reformers and "antis," 
but habitually will rest upon the side of the well-disciplined army 
of office-holders. The honest and intelligent application of the 
merit principle to administrative appointments reduces the num- 
ber of workers under the control of a faction, and makes the sup- 
port of the "slate" far less formidable. If the group in power 
centers around some principle or policy, it will continue to be 
powerful and effective in the primaries, even under the merit 
system ; but if the chief element of cohesion was public office, it 
will be far less vigorous than before. Patronage is not only 
the force that holds an organization together, but it is the strong- 
est single element, and no practical politician is ever guilty of 
despising the power of appointing men to, and removing them 
from, office. There are, of course, many exceptions, but the 
general practice is for the appointing power to control the politi- 
cal activity of the appointee. When the office is obtained by 
merit, however, and not by favor, this sense of obligation on the 
part of the officer and of power on the part of the party ruler 
ceases. Hence the mobilization of an army for effective 
use in a primary campaign becomes far more difficult, and the 
opportunities for success on the part of the opposition corre- 
spondingly greater. To the extent that the merit system is not 
rigidly carried out, the effects, just indicated, do not follow. In 
any event, it is not to be presumed that civil service reform is a 
panacea. It is merely a palliative. It will materially help, but 
cannot be relied upon to accomplish a complete cure for our politi- 
cal ills. The merit system merely abolishes the feudal tenure 
under which many officers now hold, and the obligations of ser- 
vice incident to that relationship. It will remove one handicap 
to an even race between candidates for a nomination. 

It is a serious question whether public appropriation should 
not be made to defray a part of the expenses of candidates in 
primaries. Already in most states all of the cost of the primary 



78 Readings on Parties and Elections 

election itself is paid from the public treasury. The payment of 
election judges, the printing and distribution of ballots and 
booths, the rent of polling-places, and other similar expenditures 
incident to holding a primary are usually met from the public 
funds, although at the outset all such charges were covered by 
party assessments upon candidates. The government might 
also undertake to place in the hands of every voter in the given 
district a brief statement regarding the record and platform of 
each candidate. Such statements, prepared by the candidates' 
friends, or critics, might be bound together and sent to every 
member of the party in the constituency interested. The ex- 
pense would not be great, while the educational value to the 
public would warrant an appropriation for the purpose. At any 
rate, the government might defray the cost of distributing such 
material. It might also be possible to allow candidates the 
use of certain public buildings, such as schoolhouses, or perhaps 
to secure other meeting-places and permit their use by the several 
contestants. There is serious danger that under the present 
system the man without large means may find it almost impossi- 
ble to enter the primary lists, or that he may incur obligations of 
a character that may interfere with his usefulness to the public. 
The candidate should not be subjected to the temptation of 
mortgaging his future political conduct for the sake of securing 
the necessary campaign fund. 

After all such remedies have been considered, it is clear that 
no readjustment of the political machinery can be relied upon to 
produce ideal political conditions. It is a common American 
fallacy to conclude that when a constitutional amendment, or a 
statute, or a charter, is secured the victory has been won and 
that the patriotic citizen may go back to the neglected plow. 
It is easier to secure ten men to fight desperately for good legis- 
lation than one who will fight steadily and consistently for effi- 
cient administration. Every student of politics knows, how- 
ever, that there is no automatic device that will secure smoothly 
running self-government while the people sleep. Perpetual mo- 



The Convention and the Direct Primary 79 

tion and automatic democracy are equally visionary and im- 
possible. The governor gauges the pressure of public interest 
and regulates his conduct accordingly. The level of politics is 
in the long run the level of public interest in men and affairs 
political. Under any system the largest group of interested 
and active citizens will determine public policies, and will select 
the persons to formulate and administer them. The unin- 
terested, or the spasmodically interested, the inactive and the 
irregularly active, will be the governed, not the governors. 

Neither primary legislation nor any other type of legislation 
can change this situation. We may make it easier for the people 
to express their will ; we may simplify the government and ren- 
der it more clearly and directly responsible, but this alone will 
not insure the desired result. We may remove obstructions 
and hindrances and facilitate popular control, but we cannot do 
more. 

The direct primary system is, therefore, to be regarded as an 
opportunity, not as a result. It signifies the opening of a broad 
avenue of approach to democracy in party affairs, but not the 
attainment of the goal. 



IV. The National Convention and the Election of the 

President 

i. the composition of the national convention l 

The most spectacular feature of our party life is undoubtedly 
the campaign for the election of the President. Its coming 
is looked forward to by all classes of our people, for upon its 
outcome depends not only who shall be our national executive, 
but to a great extent what shall be our national policy for 
the next four years. Who form the national convention which 
is to nominate the party candidate for President, where they 
are to meet, and how they act, become therefore questions of 
unusual popular interest. 

As the first act in the campaign the chairman of the National 
Committee of his party, calls the Committee to meet for the 
purpose of appointing a time and place for holding the National 
Convention. 

The National Committee will usually meet in Washington, 
D.C. Washington is the political capital of' the country, the 
political headquarters, especially while Congress is in session. 
Many members of the National Committee are members of Con- 
gress, and the national capital is, therefore, the most convenient 
place for the Committee to meet. The Democratic Committee 
usually meets on the 2 2d of February of a presidential year, the 
Republican Committee in January or December. While the Re- 
publicans have no fixed time for the meeting of their Committee, 
custom has made it at least six months before the date to be set 
for the convention. The chief purpose of this meeting is to issue 
the call for the National Nominating Convention. . . 

1 Woodburn, J. A., Political Parties and Party Problems in the United 
States. Putnams, New York, 1906; pp. 152— 162. 

80 



Convention and Election of President 81 

A matter of temporary importance, and the one which ex- 
cites the greatest public interest and attention at this meeting 
of the Committee, is the choice of a convention city. Delega- 
tions from rival cities appear before the Committee. In the 
early years of the century Baltimore had the distinction of being 
known as the ' Convention City.' It was easy of access, half- 
way between the North and the South, and it was supposed not 
to be decisively permeated with either Northern or Southern in- 
fluence. In later years Chicago has more frequently than any 
other city entertained the National Conventions. In its location 
and from its railroad facilities Chicago is more easily and fairly 
accessible from all parts of the country. The size of the city, 
its large auditoriums, and its hotel accommodations enable it to 
entertain the immense crowds of delegates and visitors that as- 
semble at these quadrennial conventions. It is quite desirable, 
if not almost essential, that the convention city should be a city 
of the first class, affording these conveniences and facilities. 
But it is not always from these considerations that the National 
Committee chooses the place for the Convention. It may be 
deemed good politics, as a means of influencing the political 
opinion of a community, to have the Convention meet in a par- 
ticular section of the country ; it may be claimed that to choose 
Indianapolis would be to secure for the party the electoral vote 
of Indiana, or to choose Kansas City would make sure of the 
votes of Kansas and Nebraska. It is not evident that the Con- 
vention carries with it such influence in the election. The friends 
of a particular candidate in control of the Committee may deem 
it inadvisable in the interest of their candidate to have the Con- 
vention held, for instance, in New York, or Philadelphia, where, 
presumably, the influence locally of the press and party would 
be adverse; and, again, a responsible commercial delegation 
from a city may offer to the Committee a money donation to 
the campaign fund of the party, and offer to pay all the expenses 
of the Convention in exchange for the choice of their city. A 
committee of fifty or sixty business men from a city seeking the 

G 



82 Readings on Parties and Elections 

Convention make a trip to Washington, and these, combined 
with the Senators and Representatives of that section of the 
country, importune the National Committee and present the 
1 claims' of their city. This is generally done to bring visitors 
and money to the city, and the effort to 'land' the Convention 
is made by local business men and hotel interests regardless of 
politics. In 1900, Philadelphia promised to the Republican 
National Committee a donation of $100,000 'to bring the Con- 
vention to that city, and Kansas City offered $50,000 and the 
expenses of the Convention to the Democratic Committee. The 
money offer is often a decisive factor in the choice of the Com- 
mittee. . . 

The number of delegates from the States to the National 
Convention is as follows : Four delegates-at-large from each state, 
— that is, double the number of United States Senators to which 
the State is entitled. If the State has a Congressman-at-large 
in the Lower House, two more delegates-at-large are added. 
Two delegates are allotted to each congressional district of the State. 
Thus each State has twice as many delegates as it has Senators 
and Representatives in Congress, or twice as many as its 
electoral vote. Delaware has three electoral votes, one 
for each of its Senators and one for its Representative in Con- 
gress. New York has thirty-six electoral votes, two for its 
Senators and thirty-four for its Representatives. In the 
National Conventions Delaware has six delegates and New 
York seventy-two. Before 1852 the numbers in the National 
Conventions were the same as in the Electoral College, one dele- 
gate for each elector. For twenty years after 1852, in the Demo- 
cratic Convention, the numbers were increased to two delegates 
for each elector, but each delegate had only half a vote. In 
1872 the Democratic Convention gave each delegate a whole 
vote, while the number of delegates remained double that of the 
electors. The Republicans adopted this rule of membership in 
i860, and it has been the rule of both parties since 1872. In 
addition to the State delegates, two delegates have usually been 



Convention and Election of President 83 

allotted to each of the Territories. This helps to develop party 
feeling and party strength in the Territories in anticipation of 
their coming into the Union as States. In the Democratic Con- 
vention of 1896, in accordance with a report of the Committee 
on Credentials, the Territorial representation was increased from 
two to six delegates for each Territory, and the official call 
of the National Republican Committee in 1900 recommended 
a similar increase from the Territories for that party. In the 
Republican Convention the Territorial delegates vote as other 
delegates, but in the Democratic Convention the Territorial 
delegates have no votes, — a fact which again indicates the dis- 
position of the Democratic party to govern, or to choose its 
rulers and its candidates, by the action of States. The Republi- 
can Committee in its call recommended that the Territories of 
Arizona, Indian Territory, New Mexico, and Oklahoma (pro- 
spective States), each elect six delegates and that Alaska elect 
four delegates, leaving the District of Columbia still only two, 
and the admission of these additional delegates was recommended 
to the Convention. The Convention of 1900 acted on the rec- 
ommendation and admitted six delegates each from Arizona, 
New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Indian Territory, and two each 
from Alaska, District of Columbia, and Hawaii. With this in- 
crease the National Republican Convention consists of 894 State 
delegates (twice 447, the vote of the Electoral College) and thirty 
Territorial delegates, making a Convention membership of 924 
in all. In addition to the delegates an equal number of alter- 
nates are elected to act in case of the absence of the delegates. 
The alternates are elected at the same time and in the same man- 
ner as the delegates; they sit in the Convention immediately 
behind the delegates. . . 

The district plan of electing the delegates is comparatively 
recent. Formerly, in both parties, the delegates for the whole 
State were appointed by the general State convention, and in 
some parts of the country, especially in New York and the East- 
ern States, this is still the custom in the Democratic party. 



84 Readings on Parties and Elections 

State appointment recognizes the delegation as representing the 
State, and it gives greater power and prestige to the State as 
such, enables it to act as a unit, and this may account for the 
greater favor with which it has met in the Democratic party, as 
that is the party which tends more to advocate and defend the 
powers and rights of the States. But it is less popular than the 
district plan. It enables a shrewd politician in control of the 
party machinery of his State, and who is thereby able to manip- 
ulate the State convention of his party, to gain larger influence 
and power. A 'snap judgment' may be more easily taken as 
against the wishes of the masses of the party. These have a 
better chance to exert their influence in smaller district 
conventions. 

The delegates to the National Conventions are usually ac- 
tive party men, politicians in their respective districts who give 
a good deal of time and attention to politics. They are fre- 
quently able and astute managers, not office-seekers always, 
though often so, but men whose services to the party entitle 
them to some distinction and recognition. The delegates-at- 
large are usually men of State or national reputation, the party 
leaders of the State, the United States Senators, or men whose 
renown or power as speakers and managers will give the delega- 
tion weight and influence in the Convention. 

Of recent years much criticism has arisen on account of the 
presence in the National Convention of the party of the Admin- 
istration, of Federal office-holders. It is alleged that these Fed- 
eral officers exercise an undue influence in controlling political 
action and in thus retaining in power their party chieftain, the 
dispenser of their salaries and patronage. . . 

The question has been raised in late years, and it is especially 
urged upon the Republican organization, whether representation 
in a National Convention ought not to be in proportion to party 
strength within a State. At present the States are represented 
in the National Convention as they are represented in the Na- 
tional Congress, — in proportion to population. In a Republi- 



Convention and Election of President 85 

can National Convention a hopelessly Democratic State has the 
same voting strength as a safe Republican State of the same 
population. Georgia casts the same vote in nominating the 
Republican candidates as Iowa, though Iowa is quite sure to con- 
tribute to the election of the party candidate and Georgia is 
equally sure not to do so. The Republicans of Iowa cast, 
in 1900, 307,000 votes, while the Republicans of Georgia 
cast only 35,000 votes. For the party candidate in 1900 
the Republicans of Ohio cast 543,000 votes, while the Repub- 
licans of South Carolina, Mississippi, and Louisiana to- 
gether cast 23,565 votes. In a National Republican Con- 
vention, Ohio Republicans may cast only forty-six votes, 
while the Republicans from these three Southern States may 
cast fifty-two. Why should not the voters of the party who are 
to be relied upon to elect the candidate be allowed to determine 
the party candidate and the party policy ? Or, why should they 
not have weight in doing this in proportion to their party num- 
bers, in proportion to the votes which they cast for the party 
candidates ? Party conventions within the States recognize the 
democratic representative principle. The different counties of 
the State are represented in the State conventions of the party 
in proportion to party numbers. Party vote in the counties, 
not population, is everywhere recognized as the true basis of 
representation. A county is allotted one delegate, say, for 
every two hundred votes (or major fraction thereof) cast for the 
party candidate at the head of the ticket at the last preceding 
election. No one questions the fairness of this representation. 
The late Populist party, with no traditions to bind it, recognized 
the new popular basis of representation in National Conventions. 
It allowed that each State should appoint two delegates-at-large, 
and then one for every two thousand votes cast in the State 
for the Populist electors in 1892. Thus in the Populist 
Convention of 1896, Texas, entitled in the old party conven- 
tions to thirty votes, had one hundred and three votes, while 
New York had but thirty-six votes. Kansas had ninety-two 



86 Readings on Parties and Elections 

votes, Connecticut but six. From States where the Populist 
party was strong the delegation was large. This would tend to 
secure a nomination and a platform not by States but by the 
mass of the voters of the party. By this plan the party, not 
the States, makes the platform and the candidates. 



2. THE CALL OF A NATIONAL CONVENTION 1 

The official call of the National Convention is the first big 
gun fired in the party campaign. It is the signal to all the 
candidates who have been nursing their chances to become the 
party's candidate that at last the real struggle within the party 
is coming to a head. 

To the Republican Electors of the United States : 

In accordance with established custom and in obedience to 
instructions of the Republican National Convention of 1904, the 
Republican National Committee now directs that a National 
Convention of delegates representative of the Republican party 
be held in the city of Chicago, in the State of Illinois, at 12 o'clock 
noon, on Tuesday, the 16th day of June, 1908, for the purpose of 
nominating candidates for President and Vice-President, to be 
voted for at the Presidential election, Tuesday, November 3, 
1908, and for the transaction of such other business as may 
properly come before it. 

The Republican electors of the several states and Territories 
including Hawaii, the District of Columbia, Alaska, Porto Rico 
and the Philippine Islands, and all other electors, without regard 
to past political affiliation, who believe in the principles of the 
Republican party and indorse its policies, are cordially invited 
to unite under this call in the selection of delegates to said con- 
vention. 

Said National Convention shall consist of four delegates-at- 

1 Official Call, by the Republican Committee, 1908. 



Convention and Election of President 87 

large from each State, two delegates for each Representative-at- 
large in the Congress, two delegates from each Congressional 
district and from each of the Territories of Arizona, New Mexico 
and Hawaii, two delegates from the District of Columbia, and 
two delegates from each, Alaska, Porto Rico and the Philippine 
Islands. For each delegate elected to this convention an al- 
ternate delegate shall be chosen to serve in case of the absence of 
his principal. 

The delegates-at-large and their alternates shall be elected by 
popular State and Territorial conventions, of which at least thirty 
days' notice shall have been published in some newspaper or 
newspapers of general circulation in the respective State or 
Territory. 

The Congressional district delegates shall be elected by con- 
vention called by the Republican Congressional committee of 
each district, of which at least thirty days' notice shall have been 
published in some newspaper or newspapers of general circula- 
tion in the district; provided, that in any Congressional dis- 
trict where there is no Republican Congressional committee, the 
Republican State Committee shall be substituted for and repre- 
sent the Congressional Committee in issuing said call and mak- 
ing said publication; and provided, that delegates both from 
the State at large and their alternates may be elected in conform- 
ity with the laws of the State in which the election occurs ; pro- 
vided, the State Committee or any such Congressional committee 
so direct ; but, provided further, that in no State shall an elec- 
tion be so held as to prevent the delegates from any Congres- 
sional district and their alternates being selected by the Repub- 
lican electors of that district. 

The election of delegates from the District of Columbia shall 
be held under the direction and supervision of an election board 
composed of Sidney Bieber, Percy Cranford and George F. Col- 
lins of the District of Columbia. This board shall have authority 
to fix the date of said election, subject to prior provisions herein, 
and to arrange all details incidental thereto, and shall provide 



88 Readings on Parties and Elections 

for a registration of the votes cast, such registration to include 
the name and residence of each voter. 

The delegates from the Territories of Arizona, New Mexico, 
Hawaii and from Alaska shall be selected in the manner of select- 
ing delegates at large from the States as provided herein. 

The delegates from Porto Rico and the Philippine Islands 
shall be elected in conformity with certain rules and regulations 
adopted by this committee, copies of which are to be furnished 
to the governing committees of the Republican party in Porto 
Rico and the Philippine Islands. 

All delegates shall be elected not earlier than thirty days after 
the date of this call and not later than thirty days before the 
date of the meeting of the next Republican National Convention. 

The credentials of each delegate and alternate must be for- 
warded to the secretary of the Republican National Committee 
at Washington, D.C., at least twenty days before the date fixed 
for the meeting of the convention, for use in making up its tem- 
porary roll. 

In any case where more than the authorized number of dele- 
gates from any State, Territory or delegate district are reported 
to the secretary of the National Committee, a contest shall be 
deemed to exist, and the secretary shall notify the several dele- 
gates so reported, and shall submit all such credentials and claims 
to the whole committee for decision as to which delegates reported 
shall be placed on the temporary roll of the convention. 

All notices of contest shall be submitted in writing, accom- 
panied by a printed statement setting forth the grounds of con- 
test, which must be filed with the secretary of the committee 
twenty days prior to the meeting of the National Convention. 



Convention and Election of President 89 

3. THE WORK OF THE NATIONAL CONVENTION 1 

No large concourse of men such as that which gathers at a 
national convention can act without organization. Fairness 
between the factions, too, can be secured only if all know the pro- 
cedure and have an equal opportunity under it. How the con- 
vention is organized and what work it does is shown by the 
following discussion. 

American politics does not offer the student and observer a 
more interesting and exciting spectacle than may be witnessed 
in the National Conventions. They have been the scenes of 
many dramatic and historic events, and their proceedings are 
well worthy of the student and the historian of politics. . . 

The preliminary arrangements for the Convention are en- 
trusted to an executive committee of the National Committee. 
This committee of arrangements elects a sergeant-at-arms of 
the Convention, and to him is entrusted the duty of superin- 
tending the printing of tickets, the organization of a force to act 
as assistants, ushers, and pages to seat the people and to main- 
tain order during the sessions of the Convention. 

The National Convention is called to order by the Chairman 
of the National Committee. The proceedings are opened with 
prayer. The National Chairman then asks the Secretary of the 
Committee to read the call of the National Committee by which 
the assembly is convened. The Committee Chairman then im- 
mediately announces to the Convention the name of the tem- 
porary presiding officer, previously chosen by the National 
Committee. This nomination is usually accepted by the Con- 
vention without contest or division. If there is opposition, 
however, any delegate is entitled to place another name before 
the Convention and call for a vote ; or some one may do so as 
the representative of the minority of the National Commit- 
tee. . . 

1 Woodburn, J. P., Political Parties and Party Problems in the United States. 
Putnams, New York, 1906; pp. 176-196. 



90 Readings on Parties and Elections 

After the temporary chairman is selected he addresses the 
Convention in a formal speech on public measures and on the 
political situation. Following his speech other prominent men 
are likely to be called out for brief speeches. These calls are 
informal and are not a part of the regular order of procedure. 
The chairman then announces that until a permanent organiza- 
tion is effected the Convention will be governed by the rules of 
the preceding Convention. After the speeches of the temporary 
chairman and others, some delegate may offer a resolution like 
the following : 

"Resolved, That the roll-call of States and Territories be now 
called and that the chairman of each delegation announce the 
names of the persons selected to serve on the several committees 
as follows : 

" Permanent Organization. 

" Rules and Order of Business. 

" Credentials. 

" Resolutions.'' 

These committees, on a roll-call of States, are then named, 
not by the Chairman, but by the respective State delegations, 
one member from each State and Territory going on each com- 
mittee. With the appointment of these committees the first 
session of the Convention is at an end. 

During the recess of the Convention the committees are at 
work. The Committee on Credentials is hearing the evidence 
and pleas in the cases of contested seats, for this committee must 
report, at the next session if possible, as to what delegates are 
entitled to sit and vote in the Convention. Few conventions 
meet in which difficult contests do not come up for decision, — - 
cases in which "politics" and sharp practice play important 
parts. The Committee on Resolutions has long and late ses- 
sions, perfecting the platform to be reported to the Convention. 
The Committee on Permanent Organization must report a list 
of permanent officers for the Convention, and the Committee 
on Rules a set of rules to guide the assembly. 



Convention and Election of President 91 

At the second session of the Convention the first business in 
regular order is the report of the Committee on Credentials. 
If this committee is not ready to report it will probably ask for 
leave to sit continuously until it completes its labors. The 
Convention cannot proceed with its business until it is decided 
who has a right to take part in its proceedings, and after the per- 
manent organization is effected the Convention may have to 
adjourn from time to time to await the conclusion of the Creden- 
tials Committee. But the delay of this committee in reporting 
does not postpone the permanent organization. This may be 
effected under the presidency of the temporary chairman, with 
the understanding that those may vote on questions relating to 
permanent organization who hold the certificates of membership 
in the Convention issued by the Secretary of the National Com- 
mittee. Whether some of these are subsequently displaced by 
the report of the Credentials Committee may be determined 
later, but it must, however, be before the more important busi- 
ness of the Convention is transacted. If it be found necessary 
to grant the Credentials Committee more time the temporary 
chairman calls for the report of the Committee on Permanent 
Organization. This committee reports the name of a permanent 
chairman, a corps of secretaries, and a list of vice-presidents, 
one from each State. If these nominations are accepted by the 
Convention the permanent chairman is escorted to the platform 
and, on taking the chair, he also makes a speech to the Conven- 
tion, congratulating the party, urging harmony and wisdom in 
the party councils, reviewing and defining the issues, in brief, 
sounding a keynote for the approaching campaign. If, however, 
the Committee on Credentials be ready to report before the per- 
manent organization is effected, the Convention proceeds to act 
upon the report to determine its own membership. The Con- 
vention usually accepts the majority report of its Committee on 
Credentials, but sometimes it substitutes a minority report in- 
stead. Sometimes, as between contesting delegations from a 
State, the Convention decides to seat both delegations, giving 
each delegate a half vote. . . 



92 Readings on Parties and Elections 

Having been permanently organized and having fixed the 
membership of the Convention, the assembly then proceeds to 
consider the 'platform' reported by the Committee on Resolu- 
tions. The platform is an address to the people, consisting 
sometimes of various 'planks,' or a series of resolutions, some- 
times of an address without division into numbered sections, 
containing the principles and program of the party. It arraigns 
the opposing party for its errors, criticises it for its course, joins 
issue with it on prominent policies before the public, and gives 
promise as to what the party will do if it is elected to or retained 
in power. In the platform the managers usually try to conciliate 
every section of conflicting party opinion, and they frequently 
produce a document which treats with 'prudent ambiguity' the 
questions on which there is division within the party. 

The platform came along with the Convention system. The 
Democratic declarations of 1840 may be said to be the first that 
involved the three essential factors of a modern platform, — a 
statement of fundamental party principles, policies to be pur- 
sued under the pending circumstances, and pledges that these 
principles and policies will be carried out. Before this there were 
addresses adopted at public meetings, resolutions approved by 
ratification meetings, criticisms or defences of the Administra- 
tion published by party leaders, which were generally accepted 
as the basis of party action ; but these were not platforms in our 
modern sense. In a general way only, not in the modern party 
sense, as an expression adopted by elected representatives of the 
party, may the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions of 1798 be 
called the platform upon which Jefferson and his party appealed 
to the country in opposition to the Federalist Administration of 
that day. 

The National Conventions of the two parties are very similar 
to one another. But there are a few differences that are im- 
portant, differences which are regarded as 'fundamental and as 
revealing the underlying tendencies and principles of the two 
parties. These differences may be summed up in what are 



Convention and Election of President 93 

known as the two-thirds rule and the unit rule.' The two-thirds 
rule provides that no candidate shall be declared nominated un- 
less he shall have received two thirds of all the votes cast. This 
rule prevails only in the Democratic Convention. The two- 
thirds rule was adopted by the first Democratic Convention of 
1832, a Convention called by the supporters of President Jack- 
son for the purpose of nominating a candidate for the vice-presi- 
dency. It was used in 1836, but not in 1840, and it was revived 
in 1844 in order to defeat the nomination of Van Buren, and it 
has since been used by the Democratic party. 

There is a connection between the two-thirds rule and the 
unit rule. If the two-thirds rule be abrogated while the unit 
rule prevails, a few of the large States, though their delegations 
may be nearly evenly divided, may, by enforcing the unit rule, 
secure a majority of the Convention for a candidate whom only 
a minority of the delegates really favor. The two-thirds rule 
lessens the probability of this. These two rules have, therefore, 
been called 'two parts of a single system, and that system the 
casting of State votes as a unit.' 

The unit rule 'is one which allows (but does not compel) the 
majority of a State delegation to cast the entire vote of a State.' 
The whole vote of the State must be cast as the majority of the 
delegation decide. Like the two-thirds rule, this applies only in 
the Democratic Convention. The Republicans do not use it. 
It is a rule that has been made by the practice of the State dele- 
gations, and the National Democratic Convention has never 
seen fit to interfere with this method of casting the State ballot. 
The National Convention merely permits this manner of voting. 

The rule approved by the Democratic Convention of i860 
asserted : 

"That in any state which has not provided or directed by its 
State convention how its vote may be given, the Convention 
will recognize the right of each delegate to cast his individual 
vote." If the State has instructed or requested the delegation 
to vote as a unit, the Convention rules that it must do so, and 



94 Readings on Parties and Elections 

the majority should decide. The authority of the State con- 
vention is recognized. The State delegation may decide to vote 
as a unit, but this may not be enforced by the Convention. But, 
if the State convention has so directed, the rule is enforced. 
" This recognizes the State convention as supreme ; its instruc- 
tions must be followed. If no instructions are given, the Na- 
tional Convention assumes authority and allows each individual 
delegate to cast his own vote." 

In 1872, it was decided that in voting for candidates for 
President and Vice-President " the chairman of each delegation 
shall rise in his place and name how the delegation votes, and 
his statement shall be considered the vote of such State." This 
left to the Convention no means of discovering whether a dele- 
gation which votes as a unit is doing so under State instruction, 
or whether the majority, in the absence of instruction, may not 
be forcing a unit vote through its control of the chairman. Un- 
til 1896, the statements of the chairman have been more or less 
arbitrarily received and all objections have been ruled out of 
order, and that, too, on all questions on which a State vote 
has been called for. 

There was resistance to the unit rule in 1884, in order to 
defeat Mr. Cleveland by preventing the whole vote of New 
York from being cast for him. It was held that if " unit instruc- 
tions were ever advisable it would be when they were made with 
reference to a specific policy or a particular candidate. It was 
the practice of broadly instructing delegations to vote as a unit 
on all questions as the majority dictated, which was especially 
objectionable." But to sustain the unit rule it was urged that 
it was the right of the State to say how its will should be ex- 
pressed. "To deny the States this right is to strike a blow at 
their sovereignty. The Republican party may stand for cen- 
tralized power, but the Democratic party should stand for the 
rights of the States." The rule thus attacked out of hostility 
to Mr. Cleveland was sustained by a large vote in the Con- 
vention. . . 



Convention and Election of President 95 

The unit rule had no particular time for its origin. It is a 
growth in practice. Republican Conventions allow each indi- 
vidual delegate to cast his vote as he chooses. The Democratic 
custom as to the unit rule has never been introduced into the 
Republican Conventions. . . 

One Convention defers to the State as a final authority ; it 
recognizes an authority higher than itself. The other overrules 
the authority of the state ; it stands as a national body and does 
not recognize an authority higher than itself. This is the dif- 
ference between States' rights and Nationalism. The Demo- 
cratic custom is a survival of one of the old traditions of the 
party, — a protest against centralization. The Republican 
custom comes from a disposition to make the central authority 
supreme. . . 

It is said that the Republican party in allowing each district 
to vote independently of the State is more democratic and stands 
more for localism. But the Republican practice does not recog- 
nize the district as a unit. It recognizes neither the State nor 
the district as such. It regards the Convention as representing 
the individual citizens of the nation. Two delegates are allotted 
to each district as a convenient geographical division of the coun- 
try, but each delegate casts his own vote as he pleases, and dis- 
trict instructions cannot bind the two delegates to vote together 
nor can instructions bind them to vote contrary to their indi- 
vidual judgments. This makes them national representatives, 
not merely district delegates. It will be noted by those ac- 
quainted with American history that these tendencies toward 
centralization and decentralization respectively, are in harmony 
with the history and purposes of the two parties. 

As to instructions in a Convention, a delegate will generally 
feel bound to vote according to the resolutions of the State or 
district convention appointing him. But he is not bound to do 
so. Repeatedly in the Republican Conventions delegates have 
disregarded instructions and have been sustained by the Con- 
vention in their right to do so. State and district conventions 



96 Readings on Parties and Elections 

may instruct their delegates to support the candidacy of a 
'favorite son' of the State, and such instructions are usually 
observed, though not always. After the delegates have been 
chosen and instructed, something may come to light con- 
cerning the proposed nominee, or policy, which may make a 
violation of instructions desirable, if not necessary. Van Buren's 
letter in opposition to Texas annexation on April 27, 1844, caused 
a meeting in Virginia to change instructions ; other delegates as- 
sumed that their constituents would not regard the instructions 
as binding ; others resigned rather than carry out such instruc- 
tions. Under such circumstances it may be the duty of dele- 
gates to disobey their instructions. In the same Democratic 
Convention of 1844 the delegates from New York were instructed 
for Van Buren who were not at heart for him. They voted for a 
two-thirds rule, which was sure to secure his defeat, and then 
nominally carried out their instructions by voting for Van Buren 
on the first ballot. You cannot bind men that have no heart 
for the cause, men that are untrustworthy and untrue, and it is 
useless to bind men that are. However, for disregarding his in- 
structions, which, presumably, would be the voice of his constitu- 
ents, the delegate should show good reasons. He would be con- 
demned, perhaps politically ostracized, as for violating a trust, 
if he misrepresented and betrayed the people whom he stands 
for. The ironclad pledge was applied to the members of the 
National Republican Convention in 1880 by a resolution which 
asserted that every member of the Convention was 'in honor 
bound to support its nominee, whoever that nominee may be, 
and that no man should hold his seat here who is not ready so to 
agree.' This was an attempt to bind the action of the delegates 
after the Convention, or to prevent men of independent minds 
from participating in the party action. Such a pledge will not 
bind the unscrupulous, and men of honor do not need it. 

After the Convention has adopted rules and has determined 
its membership by accepting the report of its Committee on 
Credentials, and after it has adopted a platform, it proceeds to 



Convention and Election of President 97 

nominate candidates for President and Vice-President. In- 
terest centres in the presidential nomination. So much is this 
true, except when a party President is to be renominated, that 
the vice-presidency receives but little consideration. Geograph- 
ical considerations may influence the choice of the Vice-Presi- 
dent, or the victorious wing of the party may confer the nomi- 
nation on a leader of their defeated opponents as a means of 
soothing disappointments and conciliating and uniting all ele- 
ments for the support of the presidential nominee. It often 
happens that entirely unknown men are named for Vice-Presi- 
dent. Of course, this is a dangerous custom, for the Vice-Presi- 
dent should be a man as well equipped for the first place as the 
one who heads the ticket. 

In the contest for the presidential nomination certain classes 
of candidates are recognized. The ' favorite ' is one of the promi- 
nent, leading candidates, who has been before the public for 
some time, for whom great preliminary efforts have been made, 
who, as the first choice of a large number from all parts of the 
country, and the second choice of many others, has such support 
as to lead to the expectation that he may be nominated. The 
' favorite son ' is a leader of prominence and influence in his State, 
who, however, has not been a figure of national prominence in 
politics. His support comes chiefly from his home State, not 
generally from the country at large. His State delegates are 
probably instructed for him and are working for his nomination. 
The hope of his nomination is based partly on his recognized fit- 
ness, partly on his geographical location, largely on the liability 
of the Convention to agree upon one of the ' favorites ' or on the 
probability that the 'favorites' will kill one another off. The 
strife, the personal rivalries, the bitterness and rancor in the 
Convention are likely to arise among the ' favorites ' ; the ' fa- 
vorite sons/ or their managers, seek to avoid exciting personal 
antagonisms and animosities. 

The ' dark horse ' is the candidate who comes into the running 
after the Convention has pretty well spent its energies in attempt- 



98 Readings on Parties and Elections 

ing to choose between the 'favorites' and the 'favorite sons/ 
The candidacy of the 'dark horse' may have been thoroughly 
planned, the runner may be well groomed by astute managers 
before his name is mentioned in the Convention, or before he is 
seriously voted for there. The nomination of a ' dark horse ' is 
not likely to be the result of a spontaneous movement in the 
Convention, without pre-convention work or plan, though it 
may be so. A man who is recognized as a fit candidate, but 
who has not been in the fight for the nomination, whom the Con- 
vention and the country are not thinking of as the probable 
nominee, who has not been identified with either contending 
faction in the party, who is colorless and unobjectionable, — 
such a man is an eligible 'dark horse.' A 'dark horse' may be 
mentioned as such publicly, but it is understood that he is not a 
candidate, and if there are managers who intend to bring in his 
name at the opportune time, any intention of a candidacy on his 
part will be likely to be denied. The struggle in the Conven- 
tion is not only to nominate a man, — it is equally for the pur- 
pose of defeating a certain man, and it often occurs that the 
struggle resolves itself into ' the field against the "favorite. " ' If 
an objectionable ' favorite ' cannot be defeated by another ' favor- 
ite,' as Grant could not be beaten by Blaine in the Republican 
Convention of 1880, the field might be united in opposition to 
the leading 'favorite' by the candidacy of a 'dark horse,' as was 
done in the nomination of Garfield in that year. 

The candidates' names are placed before the Convention on 
a roll-call of the States. A candidate from one State may have 
his name placed before the Convention by another State, and 
this may be seconded by several States in succession. The Con- 
vention votes by States, alphabetically, and if the vote as an- 
nounced by the chairman of the delegation is challenged, the 
delegation is polled in open Convention. 

When there are several candidates before the Convention 
and the supporters of the various candidates are determined and 
well organized, the balloting may continue for a number of days. 



Convention and Election of President 99 

When the weaker factions begin to change their votes for one of 
the stronger candidates, the 'break' comes. Instructions and 
pledges are assumed to have been fulfilled, and the delegates 
break away from candidates they have so far supported. De- 
cisive balloting is likely to result. Delegates, as a rule, have a 
fondness for the 'band-wagon,' — that is, they wish to stand in 
favor with the successful candidate and his managers, and to be 
identified with the vanguard of victory. Consequently, at a 
'break' in the balloting, if a leading candidate seems destined to 
win there may be a rush of delegates to his support, and we have 
the 'stampede.' . . 

Adjournment is the only means of resisting a stampede, and 
if that fails, the managers of the field against the favorite see 
that the battle is lost, and the successful candidate goes in with 
votes to spare and 'with a hurricane of cheering.' A motion is 
offered to make the nomination unanimous, and this is supported 
by the defeated factions with as much grace as possible, and all 
pledge loyalty and support to the chosen chieftain. The Con- 
vention, perhaps after recess, proceeds after the same fashion 
to nominate a candidate for Vice-President, and the work is done. 
After appointing the Convention chairman and a committee 
officially to inform the candidates of their nomination the Con- 
vention adjourns sine die. 

4 . A FAVORITE-SON BOOM l 

Even though by the time the convention meets it may be 
almost certain who will be the party nominee, still states often 
loyally put forward their favorite sons as candidates. They 
may some day be in the position of the more favored candidates, 
or, if a deadlock threaten, they may even now be the men from 
among whom the compromise candidate may be chosen. 

Chicago, 111., June 16 — (Special). — Wisconsin made a gal- 
lant attempt to-day to pierce the atmosphere of the convention 

1 Milwaukee Sentinel, June 17, 1908. 



ioo Readings on Parties and Elections 

with shafts of enthusiasm, but failed. The state delegation, 
though hopelessly in the minority, with all hope of nominating 
its candidate gone, determined to make the convention at least 
sit up and take notice that the Badger state is on the map. . . 

They made a good showing. Even at that Wisconsin was 
treated but little worse than others. When the Ohio delegation 
came in with a picture of Taft as big as one of the Dahlman litho- 
graphs on the bill boards in the spring primary campaign, there 
was just a ripple of a cheer. 

The idea of doing something to show that they were attending 
the convention came to the Wisconsin men during the morning. 
No arrangements had been made, aside from the delegates as- 
sembling at the convention, until Dr. J. M. Beffel and Charles 
A. A. McGee began to wake them up. 

Something ought to be done, they said, to show Chicago that 
there was a La Follette boom in town. No matter if it was so 
small as not to be easily distinguished in a crowd. Make noise 
enough and curiosity would do the rest. The plan took. All 
that was needed was a starter. 

Dr. Beffel went out to find a sign painter who could prepare 
banners and Ellery's band was engaged to head the column of 
Badgers on a march to the Coliseum. Ten o'clock came and 
there were no signs of Dr. Beffel. Half past 10 o'clock arrived 
and still he delayed while the delegates at headquarters began to 
get nervous. Just before 1 1 o'clock, the time at which the Wis- 
consin caucus adjourned, the doctor came tearing into the lobby 
with a roll under one arm and a bundle of what looked like set 
pieces for a fireworks show under the other. He dumped both 
on the assembly room floor where it developed that the one was 
standards for banners and the other the banners themselves. 
Here was what the doctor and the sign painter had together 
evolved, in the way of stirring sentiments : 

" Little Bob, the People's Champion." " Physical Valuation 
of Railroads." "We Stand for Representative Government." 
"A Sound Currency." " Wisconsin for Robert M. La Follette." 



Convention and Election of President 101 

"Probe the Telegraph and Telephone Systems." "Tariff Re- 
vision." 

The banners were tacked in place and by the time Chairman 
Brumder called the caucus to order they were ready. 

In the caucus Mr. McGee, who had been appointed marshal 
of the informal parade, announced the delegation, with all Wis- 
consin people here, would form in double column and march 
down Jackson boulevard to Michigan avenue to the Auditorium 
where a stop would be made for the band to play a number or 
two, when the march would be resumed to the Coliseum. This 
program was carried out. With the band leading and the dele- 
gates at large at the head, the procession moved on the Coli- 
seum. . . 

It had been planned to march up the aisle of the Coliseum to 
Wisconsin's place, with the band leading. But on arriving the 
assistant sergeant-at-arms at the door backed by a stalwart po- 
liceman refused to let the band in as a rule had been adopted 
against it. The band therefore remained outside while the dele- 
gation went on inside and struggled through the crowd in the side 
aisle to its place, which is to the right in front of the platform, 
an excellent strategical position when it is wanted to catch the 
eye of the chairman. 

5. CONVENTION ENTHUSIASM 1 

The national convention is a mobile body. The parti- 
sans of each candidate do all they can to catch the support of 
wavering or opposing delegates and to influence the entire body 
by skillful appeals to the enthusiasm of those in the galleries. 

Chicago, 111., June 18. — Wisconsin's presentation of the 
name of Robert M. La Follette as its choice for president of the 
United States was accorded an ovation in the Republican na- 
tional convention this afternoon such as was given to no other 
candidate and to no other state. The name of La Follette was 

1 Milwaukee Free Press, June 19, 1908. 



102 Readings on Parties and Elections 

cheered by the people in the galleries more generally than that 
of any other candidate. 

The La Follette demonstration differed from that for Taft in 
that it appeared to be entirely spontaneous. It was a demon- 
stration among the spectators, in which but few of the delegates 
outside of Wisconsin participated, while that for Mr. Taft was 
participated in by something over 700 delegates who were in- 
structed for him and who voted for him on the roll call. 

The La Follette ovation would have been a record breaker had 
it occurred previously to the attempted stampede for Roosevelt 
on Wednesday. For more than twenty minutes the spectators in 
the gallery yelled their approval of the little man from Wisconsin. 
For twenty minutes the Wisconsin delegation stood upon chairs 
and waved banners, while Dick White of Milwaukee carried 
Robert La Follette, Jr., on his shoulders up and down the aisles 
of the convention hall. 

The familiar "U Rah Rah, Wisconsin," was heard in every 
quarter of the hall. Several efforts were made to stem the ova- 
tion, but without avail. 

The police attempted to force the Wisconsin delegation to de- 
sist, and one policeman approached National Committeeman 
Alfred T. Rogers and ordered him to get down off his chair to 
stop the cheering. This effort, too, was without avail. When 
the cheering had been in progress about twenty minutes, some 
one secured a large American flag and pinned lithographs of 
President Roosevelt to it and waved it from the gallery in an ef- 
fort to turn the La Follette demonstration into one for Roosevelt. 

When the Wisconsin delegation saw the Roosevelt flag, they 
resumed their seats. The character of the demonstration at 
once changed and the attention of the crowd was diverted to a 
possibility of stampeding the convention for Roosevelt, but the 
crowd apparently had spent its Roosevelt enthusiasm on Wednes- 
day, for within two minutes after the presentation of the Roose- 
velt banners, the demonstration ceased and the roll call began. 

When Henry F. Cochems of Milwaukee was introduced to the 



Convention and Election of President 103 

convention, the noise and disturbance which had been so pro- 
nounced during the latter part of the speech delivered by the 
man who had directly preceded him, ceased. Mr. Cochems's 
voice could be heard throughout the major portion of the great 
hall, and when the crowd learned that he had something to say 
out of the ordinary run of nominating speeches, he was given 
splendid attention. He was frequently interrupted by cries of 
"Good," "Go ahead," "We're for him." . . 

Chairman Lodge pounded with his gavel and attempted to 
restore order, but the pounding of the gavel could not be heard. 
The band in the rear gallery played. The leader waved his arms, 
but no one heard the music. 

This was Wisconsin day in the convention. Twice Wisconsin 
was heard from. Twice the galleries shouted their approval. 
Every Wisconsin man in Chicago was hoarse. Every Wisconsin 
man was happy. 

6. CONVENTION ORATORY 1 

Nominating speeches are famous for the fervid oratory 
which is often their characteristic. More than one party candi- 
date has owed his influence in the convention and even his final 
nomination to a successful appeal to some phase of the over- 
flowing party feeling, made by the man who places the candi- 
date's name before the convention. 

Wisconsin offers her candidate to the nation, not because he 
is her favorite son, not because we know him and love him, not 
because of his ability, integrity, and experience alone, but be- 
cause in him we know there is embodied in ideal poise and bal- 
ance those other splendid elements and attributes which most 
nearly respond to the requirements of the hour and the demands 
of the people, and which alone qualify for leadership in this 
great national crisis. 

1 Cochems, H. F., Speech nominating Robert M. La Follette for President, 
1908. 



104 Readings on Parties and Elections 

The paramount problem pressing for solution to-day has no 
parallel in the economic or industrial history of man. In a gen- 
eration since the war of the rebellion we have rushed at a runa- 
way pace from industrial freedom to industrial oligarchy. . . 

A government founded on a theory of equality of opportunity 
cannot survive when social and economic opportunity have been 
extinguished. We have here a problem in institutional history 
which looks beyond the selfish purpose of the hour and sees with 
sure perspective and clear vision the rights of generations to 
come and the future destiny of our common country. 

Ten years ago Wisconsin was as shackled as they are to-day 
in most of the states of the union. The interests controlled 
the state government completely. They were powerfully en- 
trenched. Led by the Governor, two United States Senators, 
eight out of eleven members of Congress, and a corps of past 
masters in the political game, they counted in solid rank the 
state Legislature, state employees, and four thousand federal 
employees. Their propaganda was published through a united 
daily press and ninety per cent of the country newspapers. 
Their commissary was largely furnished from the treasury of 
three great railroads, the united public service interests, and 
wealth of the state. The recession of the Populist movement 
made the term " reformer" or "radical" an obnoxious stigma in 
our conservative state. It was a stubborn soil in which to plant 
seeds of reform which promised a harvest of bitterness and dis- 
appointment. None but a man of iron soul, none but a man of 
heroic purpose, would have dared to contemplate the contest 
against such odds. But Providence has furnished us the man. 
A man who saw clearly and was not afraid. 

You know something of the furious warfare which has gone 
forward in Wisconsin during those years. It was a holy war in 
the people's cause. Year after year, riding the saddle by night 
and by day, his sword was never sheathed. When the way was 
dark he kept the fires lighted upon the hills; when the people 
wearied his strong arm was about them. . . 



Convention and Election of President 105 

To those who call him Radical our reply is that the radicals 
to-day are the blind, without perspective, who will not see that 
the demands of conditions have outstripped the relief of legisla- 
tion, and who obstruct the passage of such necessary relief. Our 
further answer is that no propaganda was ever announced in 
his career which has not been justified by the course of events 
and to-day in Wisconsin no man asks the repeal of a letter of the 
laws written upon the books through his labor and his genius. 
We have never marched to Moscow, have never struck our colors, 
and we have never sounded a retreat. The meaning of conser- 
vatism has been prostituted to mean stagnation. The country 
demands a progressive conservative, a man who, instructed by 
the lessons of the past, will yet move on and on, planting the 
flag further and yet further forward, until justice shall come into 
its own and the spirit of American institutions be vindicated. 

If we are to stay the fatal progress of perverse conditions we 
cannot falter, we cannot compromise, we cannot turn back. 
This is a war, a war in which modern industrialism is on trial and 
in which the institution of private property is being weighed in 
the balance. In this contest there is no place for the genial and 
gentle art, or men of peace, for compromise to-day spells death. 
In this war the people will have their own leader. They will 
have no raw recruit, but a veteran, bronzed and battered in the 
conflict. They will have no cadet, but a general, skilled not 
only in regular battle, but who has triumphed over Indian and 
guerilla warfare ; who cannot be seduced by flattery and smiling 
promise, who knows the proffered hand of Esau, and who will 
fight on and on until predatory wealth has found its Appomattox. 

We offer him here. I have seen him in the fray, with jaw set, 
his eyes blazing, his whole figure instinct with indomitable 
energy for the justice of his cause. Man of battle, unparalleled 
in the history of American politics, fighting the cause of the com- 
mon people, his sword ringing upon the armor of his enemy, 
neither asking nor giving quarter. Call him ambitious, call him 
hypocrite, call him demagogue, all familiar words in the vernacu- 



106 Readings on Parties and Elections 

lar of his enemies, but call him what you will, he will live in 
memory as the most splendid type of fighting citizen which this 
generation has given to the Republic. . . 

We believe that the pioneer in this movement who was good 
enough to break the stubborn soil and plant the seed, is good 
enough to reap the golden harvest and bring it home to the peo- 
ple in its bounty. Through all the years Robert M. La Follette 
has stood like "a bold mountain about whose summits the hurri- 
canes have raged in vain and upon whose base the angry waves 
have beat their surge, unshaken and unshakeable." For ten 
years he has carried this war upon the point of his sword and 
from the light that gleamed from his shining blade was lit the 
blaze that carried forward the war in Wisconsin, fired the heart 
of Roosevelt, and to-day, like the face of the morning, is leading 
the national crusaders along the pathway of reform. 

The laborer is worthy of his hire. Wisconsin offers her fore- 
most citizen, a man of iron with a heart of gold, Robert M. 
La Follette. 

7. THE ELECTION OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES l 

Few of us realize that nominally no citizen votes at the 
national election for a candidate for President. The vote is 
for one who is nominally to help select, though in fact only to 
be the bearer of the party will as to who should be, President. 
How these members of the so-called "electoral college" are 
chosen, is a matter still left almost entirely with the states. The 
Federal government has, however, provided how the votes of the 
"electors" shall be cast. 

The highest offices in the national government are not filled 
by direct vote. The president and vice-president are chosen by 
the electoral college ; United States senators are elected by the 
legislatures of the states, and the judges of the United States 
supreme court are appointed by the president with the consent 
of the senate. . . 

1 Fuller, R. H., Government by the People. Macmillan, 1908 ; pp. 120-134. 



Convention and Election of President 107 

Although the names of the party candidates for president and 
vice-president appear upon the ballots, the voters do not vote for 
them but for presidential electors, whose duty it is to elect them. 
The framers of the constitution did not deem it wise to leave the 
choice of the president to the mass of the voters, because they 
feared that the voters were not sufficiently conservative and in- 
telligent to make a judicious choice. Their distrust has been 
corrected by custom and precedent, but it is still possible for a 
presidential candidate to be the choice of a majority of all the 
voters participating in the election and yet sutler defeat. 

Various plans were proposed for the election of the president 
without resort to a direct vote. It was suggested that the elec- 
tion be left to the congress, but the constitutional convention 
was unwilling to adopt this idea because it would make the chief 
executive subordinate to the legislative body. The plan of leav- 
ing the election to the state legislatures was also rejected. The 
convention finally decided to create an electoral college, con- 
taining as many electors as there are senators and representatives 
in congress, on the theory that such a body would represent the 
best intelligence of the nation. Party organization was then in 
embryo. The national party convention had not yet come into 
existence and there was no recognized method of designating 
party candidates. The election turned upon the qualifications 
of the individual candidates rather than upon the principles and 
doctrines of the parties to which they belonged. The electors, 
therefore, were left free to exercise their own judgment in cast- 
ing their votes for the two highest national offices. 

It was provided that if no candidate received a majority of 
the votes in the electoral college, then the house of representa- 
tives should elect, its members voting by states and each state 
having one vote. The choice of the house, however, was limited 
originally to the five, and after 1S04 to the three, candidates 
who had received the highest number of votes in the electoral 
college. 

The constitution originally required each elector to vote for 



108 Readings on Parties and Elections 

two candidates for president and the candidate who received the 
most votes was declared elected president, while the candidate 
who received the next highest number of votes was declared 
elected vice-president. This plan gave the strongest candidate 
in the electoral college the presidency and his foremost competi- 
tor the vice-presidency. It was very likely that the two men 
would hold opposing political views, so that, in effect, the major- 
ity party elected the president and the minority party the vice- 
president. In case of the death of the president while in office, 
the majority party would have been compelled to give way to the 
minority, since the vice-president would succeed to the presi- 
dency. The adoption of this plan could have been possible only 
at a time when men were considered rather than parties, when 
parties had not begun to formulate their principles in national 
" platforms," and when the offices within the appointing power 
of the president were not used to build up party organizations 
upon the plan of the " spoils system." George Washington was 
twice elected president by practically unanimous consent. The 
federalists in 1796 united upon John Adams for president and 
Thomas Pinckney for vice-president, while the democratic- 
republicans selected Thomas Jefferson for president and Aaron 
Burr for vice-president. There were 138 electors in the elec- 
toral college and each of them voted for two candidates for presi- 
dent. The result gave Adams seventy-one votes, Jefferson 
sixty-eight, Pinckney fifty-nine, Burr thirty, Samuel Adams 
fifteen, Oliver Ellsworth eleven, George Clinton seven, John 
Jay five, James Iredell three, George Washington two, John 
Henry two, Samuel Johnson two, and Charles C. Pinckney one. 
John Adams was elected president and Thomas Jefferson, his 
great rival, was made vice-president. This was the first presi- 
dential election in which there was a contest. 

In the next presidential election, in 1800, the two parties put 
forward the same candidates as before and the members of the 
electoral college for the first time voted by parties. Jefferson 
and Burr each received seventy-three votes, the full strength of 



Convention and Election of President 109 

the democratic-republicans. Adams received sixty-five votes, 
and Pinckney sixty-four, one federalist elector voting for John 
Jay so that Adams might have one more vote than Pinckney 
and thus be entitled to the presidency if the federalists should 
win. The democratic-republicans had not taken this precau- 
tion and therefore there was a tie vote between their two candi- 
dates, Jefferson and Burr, for the presidency, although they had 
intended to elect Burr to the vice-presidency. Because of this 
tie, the election was thrown into the house of representatives, 
where, after thirty-six ballots, ten states voted for Jefferson and 
four for Burr. The constitution was then amended so as to pro- 
vide for the election of the president and the vice-president by 
separate ballots for each office. 

In the presidential campaign of 1824 Andrew Jackson, John 
Quincy Adams, Henry Clay, and William H. Crawford were 
candidates for president. John C. Calhoun was chosen vice- 
president by the electoral college, but none of the presidential 
candidates had a majority of the electors, the vote being : Jack- 
son ninety-nine, Adams eighty-four, Crawford forty-one, and 
Clay thirty-seven. The election of the president, therefore, 
was again thrown into the house of representatives and Adams 
was elected by a majority of the states, receiving thirteen votes 
to seven for Jackson and four for Crawford. Clay had been 
dropped because he was not among the first three in the elec- 
toral college. 

The closest presidential election was that of 1884, when Grover 
Cleveland, Democrat, defeated James G. Blaine, Republican. 
The popular vote for the presidential electors nominated by the 
democrats was 4,854,986, while the electors nominated by the 
republicans received '4,855,011 votes. Blaine, therefore, had 
twenty-five votes more than Cleveland in a total vote of the 
parties, whose candidates they were, of 9,709,997. In the elec- 
toral college Cleveland had 219 votes and Blaine 182. 

This was due to the fact that the Democratic electors carried 
New York state by a plurality of 1149 in a total vote of the two 



no Readings on Parties and Elections 

great parties in the state of 1,125,159. This gave Cleveland the 
thirty-six electoral votes of the state. The result of this election 
demonstrated the importance of preventing fraud in the casting 
and counting of the votes and gave a powerful impetus to the 
passage of election reform laws. A change of only 575 votes 
from the democratic to the republican side would have changed 
the result. 

Although Cleveland received a plurality of the popular vote 
in 1888 he was defeated by Benjamin Harrison, republican. The 
total vote for the democratic electors was 5,540,329, and for 
the republican electors 5,439,853. The democratic electors 
thus received 100,476 more votes than the republican electors, 
but the thirty-six electoral votes of New York state again de- 
cided the result. The republican electors carried the state by a 
plurality of 13,002 in a total vote cast by the two parties of 
1,284,516, and in the electoral college Harrison had 233 votes to 
168 for Cleveland. . . 

There is no general law regulating the election of presidential 
electors. The federal constitution says that : " Each state shall 
appoint, in such manner as the legislature thereof may direct, a 
number of electors equal to the whole number of senators and 
representatives to which the state may be entitled in congress." 
Under this permission some of the states passed laws providing 
for the choice of electors by the legislature, while other states 
chose them by popular vote. All of the states, with the excep- 
tion of South Carolina, abandoned the legislative election of 
electors after 1824, but South Carolina continued it until the 
civil war. In many of the states before 1832 electors corre- 
sponding to representatives in congress were chosen by congres- 
sional districts, while the two electors corresponding to the two 
United States senators were elected "at large" by the voters of 
the entire state. Under this method it was possible for the elec- 
toral vote of a state to be divided in the electoral college accord- 
ing to the political complexion of congressional districts. Michi- 
gan is the only state which has followed this plan in recent years. 



Convention and Election of President 1 1 1 

It gave Cleveland five electoral votes in 1892 and Harrison nine. 
The rule now generally accepted is to nominate all the electors 
in a state convention, distinguishing the two electors-at-large 
from the district electors. The list thus nominated by each 
party is printed on the official ballot beneath the names of the 
candidates nominated by the national convention of the party 
for president and vice-president, who cannot be voted for di- 
rectly. It is usual for a voter to say that he cast his ballot for 
this or that candidate for president when, as a matter of fact, he 
actually voted for the electors named by the party whose candi- 
date for president he supported. 

Even when the electors are voted for by all the voters in a 
state, it is still possible that they may be divided by party lines. 
In counting the votes cast for electors, the individual candidates 
are declared elected in the order of the number of votes each has 
received until the number of electors to which the state is entitled 
in the electoral college is complete. While the electors nomi- 
nated by a party in a state are usually either elected or defeated 
in a body, the scratching of tickets may divide the electoral vote 
of a state. For example, if a state is entitled to ten electoral 
votes, the majority party may elect nine of its candidates for 
electors while the tenth, either because of his unpopularity or the 
popularity of one of the candidates on the minority party ticket, 
may be defeated. 

There is no general assemblage of the electoral college. The 
constitution provides that the electors shall meet in their re- 
spective states and vote by distinct ballots for president and 
vice-president, making separate certified lists of all persons re- 
ceiving votes for each office and the number of votes received by 
each candidate. These lists must be sent sealed to the presi- 
dent of the senate who must break the seals in the presence of 
the senate and the house of representatives, and the votes must 
then be counted. The candidates for president and vice-presi- 
dent who are found to have received a majority of all the elec- 
toral votes are declared elected. If no candidate for president 



H2 Readings on Parties and Elections 

has received such a majority, the members of the house of repre- 
sentatives must immediately proceed to choose a president from 
among the three candidates having the largest number of elec- 
toral votes. The vote of the house must be taken by states and a 
majority of all the states is necessary to a choice. If no candi- 
date for vice-president has a majority of all the electoral votes, 
the senate must choose as vice-president one of the two candi- 
dates who have received the highest number of electoral votes 
and a majority of all the senators is necessary to a choice. 

The growth of party power and influence has destroyed the 
freedom of choice which was left to the electors by the constitu- 
tion. The electors are now regarded as mere representatives of 
the party which chooses them, bound to vote for the candidates, 
for president and vice-president nominated by that party. 
There is nothing in the law to prevent an elector from voting 
for any candidate, but the moral obligation to vote only for the 
candidates of his party is so strong that it is never broken. 

No provision was made in the constitution for the settlement 
of controversies over the choice of electors. This omission led 
to a dangerous crisis after the presidential election of 1876, when 
Samuel J. Tilden was nominated by the democrats and Ruther- 
ford B. Hayes by the republicans. It was conceded that Tilden 
had received a popular plurality of more than 250,000 votes, but 
the returns from several of the states were disputed, each party 
claiming the electors and each sending the vote of its electors 
to the president of the senate. The democrats had a majority 
in the house and the republicans in the senate, so that neither 
party was able to have its return from the disputed states de- 
clared valid. It was finally decided to refer the controversy to 
a "Returning Board" or electoral commission, consisting of five 
senators, five representatives, and five judges of the United 
States supreme court. This commission decided that Hayes 
had carried Florida by a plurality of 926 and Louisiana by a 
plurality of 4627. The supreme court of Florida had given Til- 
den a plurality of 94 in that state and the face of the returns in 



Convention and Election of President 113 

Louisiana, it was asserted, gave Tilden 5303 plurality. The 
electoral votes of these two states, however, were counted for 
Hayes, giving him 185 electoral votes and Tilden 184. The 
count was not completed until two days before March 4, 1877, 
when the new president was to be inaugurated. The democrats 
insisted that the election had been stolen from them and there 
was talk of using force to prevent the inauguration of Hayes. 
Tilden counselled submission and the excitement died away; 
but the democratic party has always since alluded to the elec- 
tion of Hayes as "the crime of '76." 

To prevent the recurrence of such a controversy congress 
passed an act in 1887 which is known as the electoral count act. 
It provides that the electors shall meet in the several states and 
cast their ballots on the second Monday in January following 
their election. In case of a dispute in any state a decision reached 
in accordance with any law of the state existing at least six days 
before the time set for the meeting of the electors shall be bind- 
ing. The governor of each state is required, as soon as practi- 
cable after electors have been chosen and contests have been 
decided, to forward to the secretary of state of the United States 
the certificate of their election, and the governor must also pro- 
vide the electors with three similar certificates, one of which 
must be transmitted by the electors to the president of the sen- 
ate. Congress is required to be in session on the second Wednes- 
day in February following each national election. Both houses 
must meet in joint session, presided over by the president of the 
senate, who must open the sealed returns of the electoral vote 
from each state in alphabetical order. The vote must be can- 
vassed by four tellers, two appointed by the senate and two by 
the house, and the result announced. One senator and one 
representative may object in writing to the reception of the re- 
turn from any state. Objections must be considered by each 
house separately, and no return given by duly certified electors 
in a state from which only one return has been received can be 
rejected ; but the two houses concurrently may reject a return 



H4 Readings on Parties and Elections 

made by electors whose appointment has not been certified. If 
two returns are received from the same state, the return made 
by the certified electors must be counted. Should there be a 
dispute regarding the legality of the certification or of the vote 
cast by the electors, congress may decide by concurrent vote 
which return is valid, and if the two houses cannot agree, pref- 
erence shall be given to the vote cast by the electors whose ap- 
pointment was certified by the executive of the state under the 
state seal. When objection has been made to the return from 
a state, it must be disposed of before the count can continue. 
No debate is permitted in the joint session, and when objections 
are being considered by the houses separately each senator and 
representative is permitted to make only one speech limited to 
five minutes. Debates cannot last longer than two hours. The 
joint session cannot adjourn until the count is completed and 
the result has been declared ; but if a question of procedure un- 
der the act has arisen a recess may be taken until ten o'clock in 
the morning of the next day. Not even a recess is permitted, 
however, if the count has not been completed on the fifth day 
after it began. The announcement of the result by the president 
of the senate constitutes the declaration of the result of the 
election. 

There has been more or less agitation, especially during the 
last few years, for a change in the constitution which will abolish 
the electoral college and provide for the election of the president 
and vice-president by direct vote. It is not probable that the 
change will be made, at least in the near future, because it would 
necessitate uniformity in the qualifications prescribed for voters, 
and the diversity of opinion on this subject in the various states 
seems too great to be reconciled. 



Convention and Election of President 115 

8. THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE x 

The actual working of the formal electoral college does 
not attract popular interest — in fact it takes place almost un- 
noticed except by the presidential electors themselves. The 
character of their work and the legal provisions governing it 
are sketched as follows. 

The popular conception of the election of the President of 
the United States becomes confused so frequently by the im- 
portance attached to the enumeration of the popular vote, that 
a careful statement of the machinery by which the President is 
elected is essential. Although the announcement made quad- 
rennially, within a few days after the Presidential election, of 
the number of votes cast for each Presidential nominee is usually 
regarded as conclusive, no actual election takes place until the 
second Wednesday of the February next following. The Con- 
stitution provides that each State shall appoint, in the manner 
to be determined by the legislature of the State, the Presidential 
Electors, who shall be equal in number to the whole number of 
Senators and Representatives to which the State is entitled in 
Congress. This number is composed of two, representing the 
number of Senators, and a sufficient number in addition to give 
one Elector for each Representative in Congress, proportioned 
on the apportionment of Representatives provided by law, or if 
the apportionment has not been made on the last decennial cen- 
sus, the number provided under the old apportionment remains 
in effect. No Senator, Representative, or other Federal office- 
holder can be appointed as an elector. It is the universal cus- 
tom to appoint Electors by popular ballot, though it was for- 
merly the practice in some of the States, for the legislature to 
select the Electors. The power is given to Congress to choose 
the time of appointing the Electors, and the day on which they 
shall give their votes, which day must be uniform throughout 

1 Gauss, H. C, The American Government. Hammersly, L. R. & Co., 
New York, 1908; pp. 19-22. 



1 1 6 Readings on Parties and Elections 

the United States. The day of choosing the Electors has been 
fixed as the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November. 
The States are empowered to fill any vacancies which may occur 
in the list of Electors, and if no election occurs the legislature may 
set a later date for the election. In case of a dispute as to the 
legality of an election of any Elector or Electors, the determina- 
tion of the person properly selected may be fixed by a provision 
of the State statutes, providing such a statute has been passed 
by the State Legislature six days prior to the second Monday in 
January, on which day the Electors are required to meet and 
cast their votes. The Secretary of State of each State must 
provide three copies of a list certifying the names of the persons 
who have been properly elected as Presidential Electors. On 
the second Monday in January, the Electors must meet and 
cast their ballots for President and Vice-President respectively, 
making three copies of the number of ballots cast, and annex- 
ing to each copy the certified list of Electors, furnished them 
by the Secretary of State. These three certificates must be 
sealed up and a certification placed upon each of its contents, 
that it contains the result of the election. One of the copies so 
sealed up is entrusted to a person who is appointed by the Elec- 
tors in writing to be delivered by him to the President of the 
Senate of the United States, before the Wednesday next en- 
suing. The second copy is forwarded by the Post office to the 
President of the Senate, and the third copy is deposited with 
the Judge of the United States District Court of the district 
in which the election has been held. 

The two Houses of the Congress meet in the House of Repre- 
sentatives Hall, at one o'clock in the afternoon of the second 
Wednesday in February, following the meeting of the Electors, 
to witness the count of the number of ballots thus cast. The 
President of the Senate presides and two members of each House 
are appointed as tellers, previously to the meeting in assemblage. 
The President of the Senate opens the ballots returned by the 
States in the alphabetical order of the States, beginning with 



Convention and Election of President 117 

the letter "A," and the result of each ballot is announced, and 
later the total result is declared. Should there be any objection 
to the ballots as returned, challenging their legality, such ob- 
jection must be presented in writing and signed by at least one 
Senator and one Member of the House of Representatives. If 
objections are presented to the vote of any State, the opening of 
the ballots is suspended, and the Senate withdraws to consider 
the objections in separate session. The House also goes into sepa- 
rate session to consider the objections presented. If only one 
set of ballots is returned from a State, no vote may be rejected 
unless the two Houses concur that the Electors had not voted 
regularly. If more than one set of ballots are presented, those 
are to be counted which are certified as regular by the machinery 
provided by the State to determine the regularity of such ballots, 
but if it appears that there are two authorities claiming to pass 
on the regularity of the votes, the matter is settled by concurrent 
vote of both Houses in separate session. If no machinery has 
been provided by the State for the determination of the regular- 
ity of the electoral ballot, the choice between contesting ballots 
is to be by concurrent action, and in case of disagreement be- 
tween the two Houses, the certificate of the Executive of the 
State in question, as to the regularity of either of the ballots is 
to be accepted. 

During the pendency of the question as to the regularity of 
the ballot of any State, no action can be taken on the returns of 
any other States. No recess of Congress can be taken except 
from day to day, unless over Sunday, and after five days, no re- 
cess at all can be taken. Upon the completion of the opening of 
the ballots and the tabulation of the results, the vote is declared 
by the President of the Senate as the official announcement of 
the election of the President of the United States. If the returns 
from any State are not received by the President of the Senate 
before the fourth Monday in January, the Secretary of State 
of the United States must send a special messenger to the Judge 
with whom the third copy of the election returns has been de- 



1 1 8 Readings on Parties and Elections 

posited, to secure that copy. When there is no President of the 
Senate in Washington to receive the returns, the Secretary of 
State is empowered to receive them. 

9. THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE — ITS DEFECTS 1 

The use of an "electoral college" of the sort now pro- 
vided for the election of President has been subject to severe 
criticism, especially in recent years. It is felt there are serious 
omissions in our present system which may give rise to serious 
deadlocks. Further, the people, in spite of the fact that the 
" electoral college" is merely a recording machine, do not have 
the direct influence in the elections which many wish. 

From the outset of the Government until 1832 great diversity 
prevailed in the methods in use in the different States in the ap- 
pointment of electors; and repeated changes were made in al- 
most every State in the law prescribing the manner of their selec- 
tion. Inasmuch as each State Legislature could alter the method 
at its pleasure, the mode of election became "as various as the 
views of different States, and as changeable as the power and 
ascendency of rival parties." Whether the district system, as 
Chief Justice Fuller asserts, and as Madison's writings seem to 
show, was considered by many of the members of the convention 
of 1787 as the most equitable, or whether there was any consensus 
of opinion among the delegates beyond that manifested in the 
decision to entrust the appointment to each State Legislature, 
it is easy to perceive the disadvantages entailed by the failure of 
the fathers to agree upon a uniform plan for all the States. 
Hardly had the Constitution been ratified by the requisite num- 
ber of States ere contests arose over the method of appointment 
of electors ; and these continued with more or less virulence un- 
til the almost universal adoption of the general-ticket system 
in 1832. . . 

1 Dougherty, J. H., The Electoral System of the United States. G. P. 
Putnam's Sons, New York; Ch. XI, pp. 281-324. 



Convention and Election of President 119 

It would be tedious to pursue the narrative of the numerous, 
almost kaleidoscopic, changes in the methods of selecting the men 
who were to represent the States in the choice of President and 
Vice-President. The animating purpose of the "diversified 
and clashing expedients" adopted by the States was the politi- 
cal advantage of the party or faction in temporary control in 
any State ; certainly, whatever the intention of the convention 
of 1787, its surviving members could not have felt much gratifi- 
cation in the actual operation of this feature of its work. . . 

In 1824 the electors were chosen by popular vote, by districts 
and by general ticket, in all the states excepting Delaware, 
Georgia, Louisiana, New York, South Carolina, and Vermont, 
where they were still chosen by the legislature. On March 13, 
1825, the legislature of New York established the district sys- 
tem, but not until it had first polled the sentiment of the people 
by formally submitting the question to them. The answer was 
so unequivocal as to dispel all doubt of the popular desire for an 
election by districts. The act provided for the appointment of 
one of the thirty-four presidential electors in each district by 
the voters, and authorized the electoral college not only to supply 
vacancies in its body, but also to appoint two additional electors 
corresponding to the two senators from the state in the sen- 
ate of the United States. This law, upon the recommendation 
of Van Bur en, then governor, was superseded in 1829 by the law 
establishing the general-ticket system. In 1828, Delaware and 
South Carolina alone adhered to the legislative system. After 
1832 electors were chosen by general ticket in all the states ex- 
cepting South Carolina, where the legislature chose them up to 
and including i860. The legislative mode of choice was adopted 
by Florida in 1868, and by Colorado in 1876, as prescribed by 
section 19 of the schedule to the constitution of the state, which 
was admitted into the union August 1, 1876. 

The abandonment of the district system became inevitable as 
the few states which had employed it began to realize the dis- 
advantages they suffered in comparison with the states that had 



120 Readings on Parties and Elections 

adopted the general-ticket system. Since the vote of the state, 
when cast in solido, swung the wriole of its electoral strength in 
favor of the candidate of one party or the other, every other state 
in which that party was ordinarily dominant would naturally 
follow such example and thereby enhance the influence and im- 
portance of its leaders in party matters, and add to the prestige 
of the state itself. States under the control of the opposition 
could not afford to give their political adversaries such odds as 
would result from the division of their electoral vote by the con- 
tinuance of the district system, while their enemies were casting 
their electoral votes en bloc. Divide et impera was a maxim of 
no application to such contests. Hence the rapid adoption of 
the general- ticket system, which amounts in reality to a poll of 
states ("The present mode of choosing the president is, though 
not generally so called, an election by states.") and in which 
the voice of the minority is suppressed. One unhappy conse- 
quence is the creation in every state of a class of political leaders, 
often persons occupying no official place, whose influence in 
achieving party successes has made them potent in party coun- 
cils and party appointments. . . 

One evil result of the general-ticket system, one great objec- 
tion to the present electoral system is that it absolutely circum- 
scribes the power and the rights of the individual voter. He 
cannot now vote for the man of his choice for president, but must 
vote for electors. There may be two sets of electors representing 
two different parties before the people, but he may not be in 
favor of either, and would prefer to cast his vote for a third ; 
yet he has no power to do it. It would be impossible for him 
alone in the state in which he lives to put candidates for electors 
in the field who would vote for the man of his choice. That 
can only be done by an organized party, which may have no con- 
siderable vote in the state in which he lives, though it may be 
strong in other states. As an illustration : In 1856, thousands 
of men in the southern states were absolutely deprived of the 
right of voting for president and vice-president, because no 



Convention and Election of President 121 

electoral tickets for Fremont and Dayton had there been put in 
the field. 

"In effect, the electoral system absolutely deprives the voter 
of his power to vote for men of his choice for president and vice- 
president unless there are enough of his way of thinking in the 
same state to meet in convention and nominate electors to repre- 
sent their views. Such a system can scarcely be called free or 
republican. No system deserves that name which does not 
enable the individual voter to cast his vote for the men of his 
choice, whether anybody else in the same state votes for them or 
not. The electoral system makes the convention or caucus in- 
dispensable in all cases and everywhere, for the individual voter 
cannot give effect to his vote, or give to it moral political signifi- 
cance, unless there are others who will act in concert, that is, 
convention, with him in the nomination of candidates for elec- 
tors." (Morton, from speech in senate, 1873.) It is destruc- 
tive of all incentive to the development of an opposition party 
organization in a state in which one of the two great parties is 
constantly predominant. The district system or an apportion- 
ment system would probably have led to the formation of an 
antagonistic party and to active political work in districts which 
seemed to be auspicious fields of operation. In many of the 
southern states in the decades preceding the Civil War there was 
no Whig or Republican organization, because such an organiza- 
tion had no chance of success in the state at large. The educa- 
tional influence of discussion in district centres was altogether 
sacrificed and a potent factor against the tyranny of a majority 
party utterly lost. In a government by discussion (to borrow 
a phrase from the late Walter Bagehot) social and political de- 
velopment is seriously retarded ; the injury which a community 
thus persistently dominated by one party sustains is almost in- 
calculable. The baneful consequences of the general-ticket 
system were witnessed in less degree, during the free silver cam- 
paigns, in communities where the advocates of the gold stand- 
ard, however numerous, had no chance of exerting a direct in- 



122 Readings on Parties and Elections 

fluence upon the choice of presidential electors, because they 
were out- voted by the friends of silver. A system of voting that 
would permit the expression of minority views, and hence give 
a more faithful picture of opinion through a state, would have 
more promptly checked unsound tendencies in finance. Gov- 
ernment by majority was never intended to nullify minority 
sentiment; the general-ticket system not only renders such 
sentiment inactive, but tends altogether to repress it. 

In states in which opposing party organizations flourish and 
where each is alternately successful, what have been styled the 
" close" states, the temptation to fraud receives powerful ac- 
cession under the general-ticket system. Almost every critic 
of the electoral system has commented upon this obvious danger. 
A fraudulent ballot cast at a presidential election in New York, 
said an able writer, (Richard H. Dana, Jr., in 117 N. A. R.) in 
1873, "affects thirty-five electors, or nearly one fifth of the whole 
number requisite to the choice of a president. In Rhode Island 
such a ballot affects only three electors, or less than one sixtieth 
of a majority of the whole electoral college. Here is a direct 
bounty on the concentration of fraudulent efforts of all kinds 
in the large states, whereby not only a vicious influence of fear- 
ful intensity is thrown into the scale of a national election, but 
all the local elements of corruption, ever sufficiently formidable 
in our most populous states, are powerfully reinforced ; " whereas 
"under the district system, on the other hand, a fraud upon the 
ballot box can affect but one elector, unless two electors at large 
should be chosen in each state, in which case but three electors 
at the most could be affected by a given fraud." 

It is hard to conceive of a system more easily adapted than the 
general-ticket system to the successful perpetration of fraud or 
offering more seductive inducements to its commission. . . 

The densely populated States, upon the general-ticket system, 
constantly tend to nullify the vote of the smaller commonwealths. 
It has several times happened in the history of the nation that 
the State of New York has been the determining factor in a presi- 



Convention and Election of President 



123 



dential campaign — the " pivotal" State; in fact, with the 
exception of the campaigns of 1868 and 1876, no election since 
1856 has gone in favor of a party that has not carried New York. 
The tendency which has been so marked for two generations, 
and is increasingly evident, towards the concentration of people 
in large municipalities, will make such States even more influen- 
tial in the future, their big electoral vote more and more decisive, 
the temptation to fraud more seductive, and the profit from its 
successful perpetration more certain. . . New York to-day 
wields thirty-nine electoral votes, which is the equivalent of 
thirteen of the smallest States, and if, under the system at pres- 
ent in vogue, a transferred vote of five to six hundred will place 
it in the Democratic or the Republican column, — and no greater 
change would have taken the State from Cleveland and given it 
to Blaine in 1884, — the incentive to prostitution and abuse of 
the suffrage could not be rendered stronger ; and even in an ideal 
community, where the purity of the ballot-box is untarnished, 
the vote of the big State, like that of the large stockholder, counts 
rather in a geometrical than an arithmetical progression. A 
plurality or majority in one section may, it is true, at times be 
counteracted by one in another section, and thus the net result 
be a rude approximation to fairness, taking the country as a 
whole; but this theory of averages may not work constantly, 
and the steady suppression of minority conviction in a state is 
an undisputed evil. . . 

This study of the methods that have been employed by the 
State Legislatures in the appointment of electors shows the 
eminent desirability of a uniform system. The evils of the gen- 
eral-ticket system become more and more potent and alarming. 
Although they were graphically depicted in 1826, in the report 
of Benton's committee to the Senate and of McDuffie's com- 
mittee to the House, it was not possible then to appreciate the 
mighty force wielded by a great State in crushing the opposition 
of a dozen smaller commonwealths. Dickerson, of New Jersey, 
in 1824, thought it a dangerous portent that in an election by 






124 Readings on Parties and Elections 

electors six great states might control the election and completely 
nullify the power or influence of eighteen others; to-day one 
great state exercises far more influence, for its decision may in- 
volve the destinies of all forty-five. The general- ticket system 
is at present universal, but the control over the method of ap- 
pointment which the present constitution gives to the states 
may result in future diversity. It cannot be foreseen what 
powerful impulsions may hereafter arise to cause some state 
legislature to disfranchise the people and revest itself with the 
power of appointment or confer it upon some small coterie, 
"the directors of a bank," or some other board or body which 
shall thus speak the voice of the state. Uniformity can be per- 
manently assured only by an amendment to the national con- 
stitution. A constitutional provision fixing territorial units 
for electoral votes, or apportioning the electoral vote of a state 
in the ratio of its popular vote among the different candidates, 
would have prevented many of the numerous factional and party 
struggles so common in earlier history, the aim of which was so 
to control electors by skilfully timed changes in the mode of ap- 
pointment as to subserve the interests of individuals and organi- 
zations. Time has also shown the force of some of the objections 
urged against the district system. The device of the "gerry- 
mander," as Senator Edmunds, . . . only a few years ago, said, 
is being more and more employed, both in respect of congres- 
sional representation and in the election of state legislatures. 1 
While the district system, properly safeguarded, would insure 
minorities some degree of representation, lessen fraudulent vot- 
ing, and aid in awakening opposing parties within a common- 
wealth, no system yet suggested would achieve these ends so 
completely as would the apportionment system. 

1 " Perils of our National Elections," 12 Forum, 691. The article 
gives a picture of the redistricting of Alabama, February 13, 1891. 



V. Senatorial Elections 

I. CONSTITUTIONAL AND LEGAL PROVISIONS CONCERNING THE 

ELECTION OE UNITED STATES SENATORS 

The legal provisions controlling the election of senators are 
only partly contained in the Federal constitution. Congress has 
executed the power granted it to "make or alter . . . regula- 
tions" by the states as to the manner in which they are to 
carry on these elections and the states themselves have added 
further rules. 

(a) United States Constitution 

Art. I. Sec. 3. The senate of the United States shall be 
composed of two Senators from each State, chosen by the legis- 
lature thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one 
vote. 

Immediately after they shall be assembled in consequence 
of the first election, they shall be divided as equally as may be 
into three classes. The seats of the Senators of the first class 
shall be vacated at the expiration of the second year; of the 
second class, at the expiration of the fourth year, and of the 
third class, at the expiration of the sixth year, so that one-third 
may be chosen every second year ; and if vacancies happen by 
resignation or otherwise, during the recess of the legislature of 
any state, the executive thereof may make temporary appoint- 
ments until the next meeting of the legislature, which shall then 
fill such vacancies. 

No person shall be a Senator who shall not have attained to 
the age of thirty years, and been nine years a citizen of the United 
States, and who shall not, when elected, be an inhabitant of that 
State for which he shall be chosen. . . 

125 



126 Readings on Parties and Elections 

Sec. 4. The times, places, and manner of holding elections 
for Senators and Representatives shall be prescribed in each 
State by the legislature thereof ; but the Congress may at any 
time by law make or alter such regulations, except as to the places 
of choosing Senators. . . 

Sec. 5. Each house shall be the judge of the elections, re- 
turns, and qualifications of its own members, and a majority of 
each shall constitute a quorum to do business; but a smaller 
number may adjourn from day to day, and may be authorized 
to compel the attendance of absent members, in such manner 
and under such penalties, as each house may provide. . . 

(b) United States Statutes l 

Sec. 14. The Legislature of each State which is chosen next 
preceding the expiration of the time for which any Senator was 
elected to represent such State in Congress shall, on the second 
Tuesday after the meeting and organization thereof, proceed 
to elect a Senator in Congress. 

Sec. 15. Such election shall be conducted in the following 
manner : Each House shall openly, by a viva voce vote of each 
member present, name one person for Senator in Congress from 
the State, and the name of the person so voted for, who receives 
a majority of the whole number of votes cast in each House, 
shall be entered on the journal of that House by the Clerk or 
Secretary thereof ; or if either House fails to give such majority 
to any person on that day, the fact shall be entered on the jour- 
nal. At twelve o'clock meridian of the day following that on 
which proceedings are required to take place as aforesaid, the 
members of the two Houses shall convene in joint assembly, and 
the journal of each House shall then be read, and if the same per- 
son has received a majority of all the votes in each House, he 
shall be declared duly elected Senator. But if the same person 
has not received a majority of the votes in each House, or if 

1 Title II, Ch. 1, Rev. Stat. U.S. 



Senatorial Elections 127 

either House has failed to take proceedings as required by this 
section, the joint assembly shall then proceed to choose, by a 
viva voce vote of each member present, a person for Senator; and 
the person who receives a majority of all the votes of the joint 
assembly, a majority of all the members elected to both Houses 
being present and voting, shall be declared duly elected. If no 
person receive such majority on the first day, the joint assembly 
shall meet at twelve o'clock meridian of each succeeding day 
during the session of the Legislature, and shall take at least one 
vote until a Senator is elected. 

Sec. 16. Whenever, on the meeting of the Legislature of 
any State, a vacancy exists in the representation of such State in 
the Senate, the Legislature shall proceed on the second Tuesday 
after meeting and organization, to elect a person to fill such va- 
cancy, in the manner prescribed in the preceding section for the 
election of a Senator for a full term. 

Sec. 17. Whenever, during the session of the Legislature of 
any State, a vacancy occurs in the representation of such State 
in the Senate, similar proceedings to fill such vacancy shall be 
had on the second Tuesday after the Legislature is organized 
and has had notice of such vacancy.. 

Sec. 18. It shall be the duty of the Executive of the State 
from which any Senator has been chosen, to certify his election 
under the seal of the State, to the President of the Senate of the 
United States. 

Sec. 19. The certificate mentioned in the preceding section 
shall be countersigned by the Secretary of State of the state. 

(c) A State Law on the Election of United States Senator 1 

The act of assembly of January n, 1867, regulating the elec- 
tion of United States Senators is as follows, viz.: 

Section 1. Be it enacted, etc., That each House of the Legis- 
lature shall appoint one teller, and nominate at least one person 

1 SmulVs Legislative Handbook. (Pennsylvania), 1909; p. 914. 



128 Readings on Parties and Elections 

to fill the office of Senator, to represent this State in the Senate 
of the United States, and at least two days previous to the joint 
meeting, hereinafter mentioned, communicate to the other House 
the names of the persons so appointed and nominated. 

Section 2. At the hour of three p.m., on the second Tuesday 
after the meeting and organization of the Legislature, which 
shall be chosen next preceding the expiration of the time for 
which any Senator was elected to represent this State in Con- 
gress, to- wit : On the third Tuesday of January, if the Legis- 
lature shall have organized previous to the second Tuesday, but 
if not so organized, then on the second Tuesday after the organi- 
zation thereof, not counting the day on which the Legislature 
was organized, each House shall openly, by a viva voce vote of 
each member present, name one person for Senator in Congress, 
from this State ; and the name of the person so voted for, who 
shall have a majority of the whole number of votes cast in each 
House, shall be entered on the Journal of each House, by the clerk 
thereof ; but if either House shall fail to give such majority to 
any person, on said day, that fact shall be entered on the Jour- 
nal; at twelve o'clock meridian, of the day following that on 
which the proceedings are required to take place as aforesaid, 
the members of the two Houses shall convene in joint assembly, 
and the Journal of each House shall then be read, and if the same 
person shall have received a majority of all the votes in each 
House, such person shall be declared duly elected Senator, to 
represent this State in the Congress of the United States; but 
if the same person shall not have received a majority of the votes 
in each House, or if either House shall have failed to take pro- 
ceedings, as required by this act, the joint assembly shall then 
proceed to choose, by a viva voce vote of each member present, 
a person for the purpose aforesaid, and the person having a ma- 
jority of all the votes of the said joint assembly, a majority 
of all the members elected to both Houses being present and vot- 
ing, shall be declared duly elected ; and in case no person shall re- 
ceive such majority on the first day, the joint assembly shall 



Senatorial Elections 



129 



meet at twelve o'clock meridian of each succeeding day, during 
the session of the Legislature, and take at least one vote, until 
a Senator shall be elected. 

Section 3. Whenever, on the meeting of the Legislature, a va- 
cancy shall exist in the representation of this State in the Sen- 
ate of the United States, the Legislature shall proceed, on the 
second Tuesday after the commencement and organization of 
its session, to elect a person to fill such vacancy, in the manner 
hereinbefore provided for the election of a Senator for a full 
term; and if a vacancy shall happen during the session of the 
Legislature, then on the second Tuesday after the Legislature 
shall have notice of such vacancy. 

Section 4. When the election shall be closed, as aforesaid, the 
president of the convention shall announce the person, who shall 
have received a majority of votes aforesaid, to be duly elected a 
Senator, to represent this State in the Senate of the United 
States; and he shall, in the presence of the members of both 
Houses, sign four several certificates of the election, attested by 
the tellers; one of which certificates shall be transmitted, by 
the president of the convention, to the Governor of this Com- 
monwealth, one to the person so elected, and the remaining two 
shall be preserved among the records and entered at length on 
the Journals of each House. 

Section 5. It shall be the duty of the Governor, immediately 
after receiving the certificate of the election of any Senator to 
certify his election, under the seal of the State, which certificate 
shall be countersigned by the Secretary of State. 

2. A CORRUPT SENATORIAL ELECTION x 

Senatorial elections have been subject to more abuse than 
any others involving national offices. Deadlocks and corrup- 
tion have often either kept states unrepresented or have caused 
their misrepresentation in our national upper house. 

Connolly, C. P., " The Story of Montana." McClure's. Nov., 1906; 
Vol. 28, No. 1, pp. 41-43 and p. 27. 

K 



130 Readings on Parties and Elections 

This excerpt describes the last day of the struggle in January, 
1899, between Marcus Daly and William A. Clark for the office 
of United States Senator from Montana. Portions of the nar- 
rative are here transposed. 

The morning of Saturday, January 28th, dawned crisp and 
clear. The sunlight flashed on the hills surrounding the capitol, 
making the great combs on the mountain-tops glisten like dia- 
mond crescents. 

A funeral pall hung over the Daly forces, while the Clark men, 
drawn and haggard from the strain of the long struggle, found 
relief in the fact that the die was cast and no power on earth 
could stay Clark's vindication. W. A. Clark's face was like that 
of a man crucified by suffering. His red eyes looked like the 
windows of a building within which a conflagration raged. Men 
who had barely slept for days and weeks had retired toward 
morning to snatch a few hours of rest. . . 

How would that courageous band of Daly men act their part 
now? They were sullen, uncompromising, defiant foes. Like 
sailors who know the ship will sink within an hour, they stood 
with their arms folded. It was strange that on this morning no 
Clark man felt elation. It was not in the air. The battle had 
been too bloody. They had these poor voters now, like rabbits 
in a warren, and would slaughter without mercy ; but there was 
no exultation. 

As early as eight o'clock, crowds of men and women could be 
seen moving toward the temporary capitol. At first they came 
in broken, irregular lines, and then in streams. Not one-twen- 
tieth of them could gain admission to the hall, but they stood 
outside the windows of the House of Representatives, and the 
streets were impassably blocked. Clark did not appear at the 
legislative hall, but John B. Wellcome, Charlie Clark, A. J. 
Steele, John S. M. Neill, and A. J. Davidson were there. 
The joint session met, the Senate filing in as the hour of ten 
arrived. 

The first order of business after the reading of the minutes 



Senatorial Elections 131 

was the balloting for Senator. The roll was called amid breath- 
less excitement, and the same vote was recorded as on the pre- 
vious day. Then for the first time in the session a second ballot 
was demanded. E. C. Day, the leader of the Clark forces on 
the floor, moved that the assembly take a second ballot. State 
Senator Stanton, of Cascade, a Conrad Democrat, moved as a 
substitute that the joint assembly dissolve for the day. The 
clerk called the roll on the substitute, and it was lost by thirteen 
votes. The Clark forces had won their first open victory during 
the session. The roll on the second ballot then began. . . 

When the name of State Senator John H. Geiger, who had 
been seated in the place of Whiteside two days before, was called, 
he rose from his seat and marched to the space in front of the 
Speaker's desk. Geiger was the member who afterwards ad- 
mitted he had found an envelop containing $1,100 in his room 
which had been thrown over his transom during the night. His 
was the first Republican name on the roll, and his action would 
determine whether the Republicans had gone over to Clark or 
still stood true. Geiger's hair had been freshly oiled and plas- 
tered down, and he had all the appearance of one who realized 
he was to play a role that would become historic. 

" Before casting my vote, I would like to have your attention 
for a few moments," he said. I will not attempt to make any 
speech — If I wanted to I could not do it. But I realize that 
what is taking place in this, probably the most extraordinary 
assembly that has ever assembled on the American soil, is a 
grave and serious thing. I have studied this matter over and 
have come to a conclusion of my own. I stand here under pecul- 
iar circumstances. I am proud to say I belong to the minority 
of this body. The first vote I cast in this assembly, I cast for 
what I considered one of the leading young war-horses of the 
Republican party ; but now the time has arrove — (laughter and 
shouts) — arriven — (uproar of laughter, after which Geiger 
desisted from the attempt to gather up his scattered sentence). 
I believe when I cast my vote I am only doing what I ought to 






132 Readings on Parties and Elections 

do, and I say to you now, and I defy the wretch or whoever 
he may be, man, woman or child (continued laughter), that I 
am about or going to be doing otherwise. I say to you, gentle- 
men, that I am doing this with hands clean, pockets empty 
(Geiger dramatically tapped his pockets amid increasing 
volleys of laughter) and conscience clear, and I am also doing 
it at the mandate and request of the Republican caucus, in 
which I did not vote. I now cast my vote for W. A. Clark, of 
Butte." 

Geiger closed his speech amid applause, hisses, and cries of 
1 traitor.' 

When the name of Marcyes, whose vote had been negotiated 
for $10,000, was called, he read a petition, signed, he announced, 
by many Republicans of his county, praying him to vote for 
W. A. Clark. . . 

Representative E. D. Matts was next on the roll-call. In the 
legislature of 1893, he had eloquently denounced Clark as a 
bribe-giver. So far he had not once spoken during the session. 
As he rose everyone gazed expectantly in his direction. 

" I have refrained from saying anything upon this contest dur- 
ing the entire session," he began, " and my sole reason has been 
that it would be utterly futile for anyone to talk upon the ques- 
tion of bribery if the men are here to sell themselves. There 
has been but one practical question, and that is : How many men 
are purchaseable in this legislative assembly at any price? I 
did not think there were as many as there are. I have always 
opposed the election of Mr. Clark because I believe him to be 
a bribe-giver; because his methods are vile and venal. . . 

" You have not heard one third of the testimony. You will 
not listen. There is evidence connecting many members of this 
body directly with the crime of bribery. This must be exploited 
to the world, and the honor, the integrity and the credit of the 
State must be disgraced by such investigation. I am sorry to 
see this man go to the Senate of the United States, like Richard 
the Third, over the bodies of disgraced men. I am sorry it is 



Senatorial Elections 133 

necessary for the manhood of Montana to be dishonored in order 
that any man may attain his end." 

As the names of the various members were called, applause 
and hisses were heard. The excitement became intense. 
Charges of bribery were bandied back and forth upon the floor. 
The presiding officer rapped again and again for order, but in 
vain. As the men voted they were hissed and in one or two cases 
the price the voter had received was shouted at him in round 
figures. . . 

The name of the Speaker of the House, Henry C. Stiff, was 
called. Stiff said : 

" I am not so vain as to suppose that anything I may say at 
this time will change the result of this ballot. I do not believe 
if an election is declared here to-day it will be a valid election. 
I know there are some men here who are honestly casting their 
ballots for William A. Clark, — some of the Lewis and Clark 
delegation, — because of the unquestioned fact that the senti- 
ment of this county, whether it be right or wrong, is in favor of 
his election. There are others voting for him, no doubt, be- 
cause of their association with him in years long gone by, when 
they knew him to be a better man than he is to-day. Those 
gentlemen are so fearfully in the minority that they can hardly 
be taken into consideration. The question has been asked on 
this floor and elsewhere in this city : How do you actually know 
that bribery has been resorted to in this election ? I say that 
I know this much : the only reason that I myself am not casting 
my vote under a bribe is because I refused to accept it — more 
money than I ever expect to have. All the millions that W. A. 
Clark possesses, in the face of these facts, could not induce me 
to cast my ballot for him. I can face my constituency and say 
that corruption, the gross corruption of this legislature, has 
never touched me." 

The roll-call was finally finished and the clerk announced the 
vote for Clark as fifty-four. Four of the Republicans remained 
true. Eleven had gone over to Clark, and his election was 



134 Readings on Parties and Elections 

declared by the presiding officer. Then came one wild, 
prolonged cheer from the galleries, and the crowd filed into the 
street. 

Helena turned out in force that night to celebrate the success 
of her candidate. Handbills were distributed during the after- 
noon. They read : 

THERE WILL BE A HOT TIME. GRAND CELEBRATION TO- 
NIGHT TO ENDORSE THE ELECTION OF HON. W. A. CLARK 
TO THE UNITED STATES SENATE. PROCESSION. FIREWORKS. 
MEETING AT THE AUDITORIUM. EVERYBODY WELCOME. 

At eight o'clock, the procession formed on upper Main Street, 
and soon after started on its march. For days the saloons and 
hotels of Helena had been ordering by telegraph quantities of 
champagne from St. Paul, Minneapolis, Spokane, Seattle, Port- 
land, and San Francisco. All during Saturday afternoon and 
night most of the bars of Helena were free to the populace and 
no one was allowed to order anything but champagne. Clark's 
champagne bill alone for that night was said by one of his 
leaders to be $30,000. 

Forty-seven votes had been procured within eighteen days 
at a total cost of $431,000, not including $30,000 turned over to 
the State Treasury by Senator Whiteside. The memorial which 
was afterward addressed to the United States Senate charged 
that: 

' For the purpose of securing the support of members of said 
legislative assembly to vote for and elect said William A. Clark, 
William A. Clark paid to C. C. Bowlen the sum of $10,000 ; to 
Jerry Connolly, $5,000; to Thomas P. Cullen, $15,000; to C. 
O. Gruwell, amount unknown; to W. J. Hannah, $15,000; to 
S. S. Hobson, $50,000; to A. W. Mahan, $10,000; to Samuel 
L. Mitchell, $25,000; to Ben D. Phillips, $25,000; to W. E. 
Tierney, $15,000 ; to D. G. Warner, $15,000 ; to W. W. Beasley, 
$10,000; to Powell Black, $5,000; to J. H. Geiger, $15,000; 
to Stephen Bywater, $15,000; to W. C. Eversole, $10,000; to 



Senatorial Elections 135 

B. J. Fine, $10,000; to Robert Flinn, $10,000; to H. H. Carr, 
$6,000 ; to J. H. Gillette, $10,000 ; to H. M. Hill, $10,000 ; to 
A. J. Jaqueth, $10,000 ; to Dr. J. H. Johnson, $5,000 ; to F. W. 
Kuphal, $4,000; to W. H. Lockhart, $5,000; to C. C. Long, 
$10,000; to T. H. Luddy, $10,000; to G. W. Magee, $17,000; 
to G. F. Marcyes, $15,000; to H. W. McLaughlin, $20,000; 
to E. V. More, $10,000 ; to L. C. Parker, $10,000 ; to R. M. 
Sands, $15,000; to M. Shovlin, $7,000; and to E. P. Woods, 
$7,000." 

That the following sums were offered to other members of the 
legislature : 

" To J. T. Anderson, $25,000; to J. R. McKay, $15,000; to 
G. H. Stanton, $10,000 ; to Henry C. Stiff, $20,000 ; to E. H. 
Cooney, $20,000 ; to H. A. Gallwey, $10,000 ; to Edwin Norris, 
G. T. Paul, and D. E. Metlin, jointly, $50,000; to T. F. Nor- 
moyle, $15,000; to P. G. Sullivan, $15,000; to R. J. Watson, 
$10,000; and to W. J. Bonner, $10,000. . ." 

The legislators went down one by one, were fought for man by 
man. This man-hunting had its intoxication, and the chase 
once begun, it made its own impetus and developed into a kind 
of frenzy. If a man had a weakness in his nature or an exigence 
in his circumstances, Clark's generals found it. His debts, his 
indiscretions in conduct, his best sentiments, even, were turned 
into effective weapons against him. His business was threat- 
ened; his friendships were menaced; his wife, his sister, and 
even his mother were often made intercessors for his tempters. 
His old associates, his creditors, his family doctor, were put upon 
his trail. 

The emotional strain brought to bear on men was so heavy, 
the promises held out to them were so alluring, and the reward 
of honesty seemed so bleak, that no anchor could hold a man ex- 
cept the needs of his soul. If he lived by bread alone, he went 
with the wind. 



136 Readings on Parties and Elections 



3. WHY WE SHOULD HAVE POPULAR ELECTION OF SENATORS * 

It is generally accepted that we have outgrown the pro- 
visions of the Constitution on the election of senators. As 
is usually the case with Anglo-Saxon peoples, when institu- 
tions outgrow laws there is a development which while keeping 
the form of the old law changes the content of the rule. Such a 
change has occurred in the election of the President, a similar 
one is in process in the election of United States senators. 

How senators shall be chosen, has become a question which 
the people of the United States must frankly face. For, that 
the phrases of the Constitution have long since ceased accurately 
to describe, still less to determine, the process of their election, 
no one can doubt who has noted how senators in recent years 
have reached their office, or who has grasped the import of the 
movement, which, during the past thirty years, has taken on 
different forms, has employed different means and methods, 
but has ever kept the same spirit and aim — a determination that 
the Senate of the United States shall be made responsible to the 
people. 

The route first attempted was by way of an amendment to 
the Constitution, providing for the election of senators by the 
direct vote of the people. Only under urgent prompting from 
outside did Congress accord much attention to this project ; for 
years it received little more than perfunctory lip-service; yet, 
so insistent became the demand, that five times and by ever- 
increasing majorities, the House of Representatives has passed 
a resolution proposing such an amendment. But all progress 
toward the goal by this route has always been blocked by the 
Senate's stolid resistance. In despair of success upon this line, 
recourse has been had to the optional, but hitherto untried, 
method of proposing amendments ; state legislatures have been 

1 Haynes, G. H., The Election of Senators. Henry Holt & Co., New York, 
1906; p. 259 et seq. Reprinted by permission. 



Senatorial Elections 137 

calling upon Congress to summon a convention for the express 
purpose of initiating this amendment. In one form or another, 
the legislatures of thirty-one States — more than the full two- 
thirds prescribed by the Constitution — have communicated to 
Congress their formal approval of the proposed change in the 
Constitution; indeed, if the votes in the House be taken as a 
fair representation of the will of the people in their constituencies, 
then only two States in the Union have failed to give their in- 
dorsement. Along this line, then, the movement has reached a 
point where it needs but the putting of these requests into a com- 
mon form and the marshaling of this scattering fire of resolutions 
into one concerted volley of demand, to constitute a mandate 
which the Constitution gives Congress no warrant but to heed. 
That the House would offer no obstruction, every precedent 
makes clear. Would the Senate still demur, and thus invite 
disaster upon itself ? 

Meantime, a vast deal of ingenuity has been devoted to at- 
tempts to reach popular control of senatorial elections by some 
other route than the amending of the Constitution. While the 
form of election by the legislature is retained, its spirit has been 
radically changed. There is not a State in the Union to-day 
where members of the legislature proceed to the election of a 
senator with that enlightened independence, that freedom of in- 
dividual discretion in the choice from which the fathers antici- 
pated such beneficent results. Everywhere the legislators ap- 
proach the task under the dominance of party, and in every 
State where one well-disciplined party is in power, the result of 
the election is a certainty even before the legislature convenes. 
Not only has party spirit claimed this election for its own, but 
the party's choice for senator is often made before the members 
of the legislature are elected, and is obtruded upon that body 
by the state convention. Already, in about a third of the States, 
either under party rules, or in accordance with the explicit pro- 
visions of state law, direct primaries name the candidates, and 
wherever a strong party is supreme, this nomination is tanta- 



138 Readings on Parties and Elections 

mount to an election. Even in the most conservative States, 
the movement for the direct primary is making distinct progress. 
In four States, provision is made for a popular "election," car- 
ried out under the supervision of officials, not of the party, but 
of the State ; an election as complete in all its details and for- 
malities as is that of the governor, yet which is as void of legal 
power to bind the legislature in the real election of senator as 
would be the resolutions adopted by a boys' debating society. 

What, then, is the outcome to be ? That depends not a little 
upon the temper and action of the Senate itself. If Senators 
have foresight enough to discern the cloud while it is yet but 
the size of a man's hand, the gathering tempest of discontent 
may be averted. For, in comparison with a rule-ridden House 
that has ceased to be a deliberative body, a Senate that gave 
evidence of feeling itself responsible to public opinion, and of 
striving to discover and serve the country's broader interests, 
might so win the people's confidence that agitation for change 
in its mode of election would lose its force. But is legislative 
election under present conditions calculated to yield a Senate 
capable of such self -regeneration ? If, on the other hand, the 
Senate continues for a few years more arrogantly to refuse the 
people an opportunity to pass upon the mode of their election ; 
if, meantime, relying upon the impregnable defenses built about 
their office by legislative election, senators persist in neglecting 
or perverting measures of the utmost public concern, while not 
a few of them are devoting their best energies to the protection 
of private interests ; if state legislatures, heedless of the earnest 
and manifold efforts made by the people to bring them to a sense 
of their high responsibility to the State in the selection of sena- 
tors, persist in using their legal freedom of choice, not for the 
selection of the best men, but of men whose presence in the Sen- 
ate is a disgrace to the State and a menace to popular govern- 
ment — then the new century will still be young when the peo- 
ple will find themselves forced to make choice between two alter- 
natives ; either they must redouble their efforts to force the new 



Senatorial Elections 139 

wine of democracy into the old bottles of the elective process 
prescribed by the Constitution, or, frankly casting aside that 
ancient mode of election as outworn, for better, for worse, they 
must take the choice of senators into their own eager, strong, 
but unskilled hands. . . 

The grounds which the framers of the Constitution advanced 
for their belief that the election of senators by legislatures would 
produce beneficent effects upon the Senate as a lawmaking body 
have for the most part become obsolete. Legislative election 
in other departments has passed entirely out of vogue and out 
of practice. It was not to be thought of that the framers of the 
constitution in the latest great federal state, the Australian 
Commonwealth, would follow ancient American precedent in 
this regard. If it is claimed that the change to popular election 
would remove a great bulwark against centralization in the or- 
ganized resistance of the state legislatures, the reply is that no 
other influence has conduced so directly to the subordination of 
state and local government to the national party organizations 
as has this process of electing senators, and legislatures thus 
dominated are little likely to impose sentiments opposed to cen- 
tralization upon the senators of their choice. The protest that 
under popular elections the Senate would fail to secure repre- 
sentation of the States as such, is academic and fallacious. The 
state legislature is but the agent ; the body of voters, the princi- 
pal. The governor personifies the State in most of its dealings 
with other States and with the national government; he cer- 
tainly is no less the representative of the State by virtue of his 
deriving his authority directly from the people than he would be 
if he were elected by the legislature. No logical principle un- 
derlies the assumption that only election by the legislature can 
authorize a man to represent the statehood of Massachusetts, or 
of New York, in the Senate of the United States. 

As to the improvement which popular election would bring 
to the quality of the Senate, it is best not to entertain too op- 
timistic anticipations. It cannot be denied that the lowering 



140 Readings on Parties and Elections 

of the tone in the Senate in recent years is not to be attributed 
solely to the method of election — which in form has remained 
unchanged — but to general influences which have lowered and 
commercialized American politics throughout the system. Popu- 
lar elections would present no insuperable barrier to the dema- 
gogue and to the corruptionist. Indeed, it is a debatable ques- 
tion, whether he would not find his path easier and more direct 
than at present. Moreover, the shortening of senatorial careers 
— which the history of other elective offices shows would be an 
almost inevitable consequence of popular election — would tend 
seriously to impair the Senate's prestige and power. The chief 
grounds for hope that popular election would, nevertheless, im- 
prove the tone of the Senate, are three : (1) No candidate could 
secure the election unless he possessed the confidence and could 
enlist the support of a plurality at least of all those sufficiently 
interested to take part in a great national election. (2) In 
the openness of the direct primary, and in the publicity for the 
weeks preceding a popular election, the people would have am- 
ple opportunity for passing a far more correct judgment upon 
senatorial candidates, than is possible in the murky atmosphere 
which often surrounds an election in the legislature. At present, 
the case is closed as soon as a candidate, who may never have 
been thought of before, can negotiate a majority from some few 
score of legislators; under popular elections every candidate's 
record and qualifications would be under discussion for weeks 
before the election, and if the popular verdict proved to be not 
in accord with the evidence, the blame could be shifted by the 
voters upon no one else. (3) Although the phrase-maker, the 
demagogue, or even the corruptionist or corporation tool, might 
capture a seat in the Senate, democracy would learn valuable 
lessons from such betrayals of confidence, and would correct its 
mistakes with more promptness and permanence than would a 
state legislature. 

The decisive advantages of the change to popular election of 
senators, however, would be found in its effects, not upon the 



Senatorial Elections 141 

federal government, but upon the individual States. However 
plausibly the apologist for the present system may argue that 
this very method of election by legislatures has remained un- 
changed since the time when it produced ideal results, and that, 
therefore, the causes of the present abuses must lie deeper than 
the mere mode of election, he cannot deny that our state legis- 
latures have sunk to a deplorably low level, and that one of the 
most potent causes of this deterioration which has unfitted the 
legislatures for the performance of this function, by what may 
seem like a paradox, has been the very exercise of it. The fact 
that this election of an important federal official is devolved upon 
the members of the state legislature blurs the issues in the voter's 
mind, distorts his political perspective, makes him tolerant of 
much inefficient legislative service on the part of the man who 
will vote for his party's candidate for the Senate. To the legis- 
lature, as a body, it brings what is liable at any time to prove a 
task as difficult and distracting as it is incongruous with normal 
legislative work ; to the State it brings interruption, it may be 
prevention of needed legislation, the domination of all issues by 
the national political parties and the tyranny of the boss, who 
almost inevitably seeks to impose either some tool or his own 
venal, or, at best, narrowly partisan, self upon the commonwealth, 
as the "representative of its statehood" in the United States 
Senate. To be rid of this would be an achievement well worth 
the struggle, the earnest of far greater progress in the future. 

4. THE OREGON METHOD OF ELECTING UNITED STATES 
SENATORS x 

Oregon has adopted an ingenious plan by which the election 
of senators is made practically a popular one. Under this sys- 
tem it has even occurred that a legislature controlled by one 
party has elected a senator of the opposite party who had re- 
ceived the support of the people at the previous election. 

1 Bourne, Jr., J., " Popular Government in Oregon." Outlook, Vol. 96, 
p. 324 et segr., Oct. 8, 1910. 



142 Readings on Parties and Elections 

Every candidate for the legislature may "subscribe to one of 
two statements, but if he does not so subscribe he shall not on 
that account be debarred from the ballot. It will be seen, there- 
fore, that three courses are open to him. He may subscribe to 
Statement No. 1, as follows: 

I further state to the people of Oregon, as well as to the peo- 
ple of my legislative district, that during my term of office I 
shall always vote for that candidate for United States Senator in 
Congress who has received the highest number of the people's votes 
for that position at the general election next preceding the elec- 
tion of a Senator in Congress without regard to my individual 
preference. 

Or he may subscribe to Statement No. 2, as follows : 

During my term of office, I shall consider the vote of the peo- 
ple for United States Senator in Congress as nothing more than 
a recommendation which I shall be at liberty to wholly disre- 
gard if the reason for doing so seems to me to be sufficient. 

Or he may be perfectly silent on the election of United States 
Senator. It is entirely optional with the candidate. 

The law further provides that United States Senators may be 
nominated by their respective parties in the party primaries, and 
the candidate receiving the greatest number of votes thereby 
becomes the party nominee. Then, in the general election the 
party nominees are voted for by the people, and the individual 
receiving the greatest number of votes in the general election 
thereby becomes the people's choice for United States Senator. 

Notwithstanding that our primary election law embodying 
these statements, particularly Statement No. 1, was passed by a 
popular vote of approximately 56,000 for to 16,000 against, the 
opponents of the law charged that the people did not know what 
they were doing when they voted for it. Therefore the advo- 
cates of the election of Senators by the people and of the enforce- 
ment of Statement No. 1 submitted to the people under the 
initiative in 1908 the following bill : 

Be it enacted by the people of the state of Oregon : 



Senatorial Elections 143 

Section 1. That we, the people of the state of Oregon, hereby 
instruct our Representatives and Senators in our Legislative 
Assembly, as such officers, to vote for and elect the candidates 
for United States Senators from this State who receive the 
highest number of votes at our general elections. 

Although there was no organized campaign made for the adop- 
tion of this bill other than the argument accompanying its sub- 
mission, while the opponents of the primary law assailed it ve- 
hemently, the basic principle of Statement No. 1 and the elec- 
tion of United States Senators by the people were again indorsed 
by the passage of the bill by a popular vote of 69,668 for it to 
21,162 against it, or by nearly three and one-half to one. 

I may here give a concrete illustration of this law's operation. 
Both my colleague, Senator Chamberlain, and myself were selected 
by the people and elected by the Legislature under the pro- 
vision of this Act. Opponents of popular government, and es- 
pecially of the election of United States Senators by a direct vote 
of the people, have bitterly assailed Statement No. 1 of our law 
because a Legislature overwhelmingly Republican elected my 
colleague, who was a candidate selected by the Democratic 
party and nominated by the whole electorate of the State as the 
people's choice of our State for United States Senator. Upon 
reflection I think every intelligent man who is honest with him- 
self must concede that this fact, instead of being the basis of 
a criticism, is the highest kind of evidence as to the efficacy 
of the law, and every advocate of the election of United States 
Senators by a popular vote must realize that Oregon has evolved 
a plan, through its Statement No. 1 (provision of its pri- 
mary law), wherein, in effect, the people enjoy the privilege 
of selecting their United States Senators, and, through the 
crystallization of public opinion the legislative ratification of 
their action. 

The Oregon Legislature consists of ninety members, thirty 
in the Senate and sixty in the House, forty-six making the neces- 
sary majority on full attendance for the election of United States 



144 Readings on Parties and Elections 

Senator. Fifty-one members out of ninety of the Legislature 
which elected my colleague, Senator Chamberlain, were sub- 
scribers to Statement No. i, making on joint ballot a majority of 
six out of a total of ninety members. All of these fifty-one mem- 
bers subscribed to Statement No. i pledge voluntarily, and it 
was so subscribed to by them from a personal belief in the desir- 
ability of the popular election of United States Senators and for 
the purpose of securing for themselves from the electorate pre- 
ferment in the election to the office sought ; the consideration in 
exchange for such preferment was to be by them, as the legally 
constituted representatives of the electorate in their behalf, the 
perfunctory confirmation of the people's selection of United 
States Senator as that choice might be ascertained under the pro- 
visions of the same law by which the legislators themselves se- 
cured nomination to office. 

To further illuminate the situation, I will state that in the 
primaries held in April, 1908, H. M. Cake received the Republi- 
can nomination for United States Senator, and my colleague, 
Senator Chamberlain, then Governor of the State, received the 
Democratic nomination for United States Senator. At the gen- 
eral election in June Senator Chamberlain defeated Mr. Cake, 
notwithstanding the State was overwhelmingly Republican, 
thereby developing from the Democratic candidate into the peo- 
ple's choice for United States Senator. The normal Republican 
majority in Oregon, I think, is from 15,000 to 20,000. With full 
recognition of Governor Chamberlain's ability and fitness for 
the office, the fact that for nearly six years he made the best 
Governor Oregon ever had, and considering that undoubtedly 
he is the most popular man in our State, I deem it but just to 
the law, and a proper answer to the criticism of enemies of the 
law that it destroys party lines and integrity, to state that in 
my opinion, Senator Chamberlain received the votes of several 
thousand Republican enemies of the law, who believed that in 
selecting Governor Chamberlain, a Democrat, they would pre- 
vent a Republican Legislature from ratifying the people's selec- 



Senatorial Elections 145 

tion, obeying the people's instructions, and electing as United 
States Senator the individual, regardless of party, that the peo- 
ple might select for that office. Thus they hoped to make the 
primary law and Statement No. 1 odious, and sought to create 
what they thought would be an impossible condition by forcing 
upon a Republican Legislature for confirmation the popularly 
designated Democratic candidate for the United States Senate. 
They failed to realize that, greater than party, and infinitely 
greater than any individual the people's choice becomes a repre- 
sentative of the principle and of the law, that the intelligence 
and integrity of the whole electorate of the State, as well as the 
integrity and loyalty of the members of the Legislature, were 
at stake, and from any honorable view-point not only would 
the mere intimation of the possibility of the Legislature, or any 
member of the Legislature, failing conscientiously to fulfill his 
pledge or loyally to obey the instruction of the people be an in- 
sult to the individual members of the Legislature, but it would 
also be an insult to the intelligence, independence, and patriotism 
of the Oregon electorate to intimate that they would permit such 
action to go unnoticed or without holding the culprit to a rigid 
responsibility for his treason. 

No oath could be more sacred in honor, no contract more 
binding, no mutual consideration more definite, than is contained 
in this Statement No. 1 pledge, and no parties to a contract could 
be of more consequence to government and society than the 
electorate upon the one side and its servants upon the other. 
Under the United States Constitution there can be no penalty 
attached to the law. The legislator breaking his sacred pledge 
cannot be imprisoned or fined, hence he is doubly bound by honor 
to redeem his voluntary obligations. Yet there were efforts 
made to dishonor our State and our public servants. But, al- 
though the greatest possible strain was placed upon our law, to 
the credit of fifty-one subscribers of Statement No. 1 in that 
Legislature be it said that every one of those subscribers voted 
in accordance with his solemn obligation. But, notwithstanding 



146 Readings on Parties and Elections 

the people of the State had passed under the initiative the bill 
I have referred to instructing all the members of the Legislature 
to vote for the people's choice for United States Senator, not a 
single member of the Legislature obeyed said instructions except 
the Statement No. 1 subscribers. 



VI. Elections to the House of Representatives and 
to the State Legislature 

i. the abuse of apportionments and single member 
districts 1 

Splitting up our voting population into small constituencies 
has given us representation of all districts, but has often re- 
sulted in the misrepresentation of public opinion. The evils 
of the old general ticket system by which a bare majority was 
enough to give a party all the representatives as a rule have been 
removed by the district system. On the other hand it happens 
occasionally that a minority of the electors get a majority of 
the representatives. Neither the old system nor the new gives 
true party representation. 

A very apparent weakness and injustice of the district system 
is the opportunity it gives a majority party to crush out and dis- 
franchise the minority. This is seen flagrantly in the " gerry- 
mander." But, even where the system is not thus abused, it is 
almost wholly a matter of chance whether the opinions of the 
people are justly expressed or not. This danger was not immi- 
nent under the earlier conditions of representation, as has already 
been shown, when electoral districts were natural units and the 
problem of representation was the federation of local communi- 
ties. But now that party lines are drawn through the midst of 
every community, it nearly always happens that one party gains 
in the elections an unjust proportion of representatives at the 
expense of others. From the theory of the matter it is possible 
to exclude minority parties altogether, and to give the entire 

1 Commons, J. R., Proportional Representation. ' Macmillan, New York, 
1907 ; p. 48 et seq., p. 80 et seq. 

147 



148 Readings on Parties and Elections 

legislative body to the majority. Suppose a legislature to be 
composed of forty members elected from forty districts, and that 
the popular vote of the political parties stands respectively 
120,000 and 100,000. If the districts are so arranged as to have 
5,500 votes each, and the parties happen to be divided in the dis- 
tricts in the same proportion as at large, we should have in each 
district a vote respectively of 3,000 and 2,500. All of the forty 
candidates of the majority would be elected, and the minority 
wholly excluded. An extreme result like this seems improbable, 
but it sometimes occurs. 

Again, it may happen, and often does, that a minority of the 
popular vote obtains a majority of the representatives. In the 
case assumed, parties may have been divided in the several dis- 
tricts as follows : — 

Party A 

Majority of 100 in 25 districts, 2,800 X 25 = 70,000 votes. 
Minority of 1,500 in 15 districts, 2,000 X 15 = 30,000 votes. 

100,000 

Party B 

Minority of 100 in 25 districts, 2,700 X 25. = 67,500 votes. 
Majority of 1,500 in 15 districts, 3,500 X 15 = 52,500 votes. 

120,000 

In this assumed case, Party A, with a total of 100,000 votes, 
obtains twenty-five representatives ; while Party B, with a total 
of 1 20,000 votes, obtains only fifteen representatives. 

Where a system offers in theory such fruitful opportunities, 
it is too much to expect party managers to refrain from using 
them. Consequently, the district system, combined with party 
politics, has resulted in the universal spread of the gerrymander. 
It is difficult to express the opprobrium rightly belonging to so 
iniquitous a practice as the gerrymander ; but its enormity is not 
appreciated, just as brutal prize-fighting is not reprobated, pro- 



Elections to the House of Representatives 149 

viding it be fought according to the rules. Both political parties 
practise it, and neither can condemn the other. They simply 
do what is natural : — make the most of their opportunities 
as far as permitted by the constitution and system under which 
both are working. The gerrymander is not produced by the in- 
iquity of parties, it is the outcome of the district system. If repre- 
sentatives are elected in this way, there must be some public 
authority for outlining the districts. And who shall be the judge 
to say where the line shall be drawn ? Exact equality is impos- 
sible, and who shall set the limits beyond which inequality shall 
not be pressed ? Every apportionment act that has been passed 
in this or any other country has involved inequality; and it 
would be absurd to ask a political party to pass such an act, and 
give the advantage of the inequality to the opposite party. 
Consequently, every apportionment act involves more or less of 
the gerrymander. The gerrymander is simply such a thoughtful 
construction of districts as will economize the votes of the party 
in power by giving it small majorities in a large number of dis- 
tricts, and coop up the opposing party with overwhelming majori- 
ties in a small number of districts. This may involve a very 
distortionate and uncomely "scientific" boundary, and the join- 
ing together of distant and unrelated localities into a single dis- 
trict ; such was the case in the famous original act of Governor 
Gerry of Massachusetts, whence the practice obtained its am- 
phibian name. 

But it is not always necessary that districts be cut into dis- 
torted shapes in order to accomplish these unjust results. A 
map of all the congressional and legislative districts of the United 
States would by no means indicate the location of all the out- 
rageous gerrymanders. In fact, many of the worst ones have 
been so well designed that they come close within all constitu- 
tional requirements. The truth is, the district system itself is 
so faulty that constitutional restrictions cannot correct it. The 
national Congress has attempted to do so by requiring the dis- 
tricts for congressional elections to be compact and of contiguous 



150 Readings on Parties and Elections 

territory, and of nearly equal population. But the law is every- 
where disregarded. Parties are compelled to disregard it, for a 
gerrymander in a Democratic State can be nullified only by a 
gerrymander in a Republican State. 

As a result of the district system, the national House of Repre- 
sentatives is scarcely a representative body. . . 

Perhaps, taking the nation as a whole, the gerrymanders of 
the United States in congressional elections do not affect the 
average result ; since, as already shown, both parties enact them, 
and the work of a Democratic gerrymander in one State is offset 
by that of a Republican gerrymander in another. 

State legislatures, on the other hand, show greater inequalities, 
seeing that the party in power outlines the districts for the en- 
tire constituency, and there are no offsetting gerrymanders. . . 

We have seen how unequally parties are represented in the 
city, State, and nation. Our representative system was con- 
trived to represent not parties, but sections. The efforts 
toward its improvement have been directed not toward equality 
of party representation, but equality of district representation. 
Congressional statutes and State constitutions require the dis- 
tricts to be of " equal" population. But this is not enforced. 
South Carolina has a " white" district as low as 134,369 (Census 
1890); but the sole "black" and Republican district, the 
seventh, contains 216,512 population. In Texas the districts 
range from 102,000 to 210,000; in Kansas from 167,000 to 
278,000; and in Pennsylvania from 131,000 to 310,000 (both ex- 
tremes in the city of Philadelphia). In Illinois in 1892 the four 
Chicago districts had an average population of 297,980, while 
the sixteen country districts averaged only 164,914. 

State and municipal representation is still more unequal. In 
New York City the State assembly districts are identical with 
the alderman ic districts. Says the Report of the New York 
Senate Committee on cities: "in the common council, as well 
as in the legislature, a voting constituency of 7,000 has the same 
representation as a like constituency of 24,000. The principle 



Elections to the House of Representatives 151 

of numerical equality, therefore, finds no application whatever 
in the common council of New York City. The same may be 
said of the principle of locality representation. The interests 
of the first and second districts are in all things practically 
alike; the total vote of the two districts is 14,498. The in- 
terests of the twenty-third district are in many regards distinct 
from those of the first and second. . . 

We have now been able to follow the various evil phases of 
recent American political life directly or remotely to their root 
in the system of electing single representatives from limited dis- 
tricts, — a system which we have inherited unchanged through 
six centuries of political and social evolution. At the present 
time, when political parties based on social questions divide the 
people and seek representation, we are using a system of repre- 
sentation based on locality. The political parties inevitably 
seize upon this machinery and use it for party ends. Thus vio- 
lently distorted, it represents neither sections nor parties. In- 
stead, it has divided the people in every district into two camps, 
each dictated by its own party machine and spoilsmen. 

2. GERRYMANDER OE STATE LEGISLATIVE DISTRICTS * 

Every State legislature which makes a redistribution of leg- 
islative or congressional districts is under a great temptation 
to use the opportunity to strengthen the party position. By 
putting sections strongly in favor of the opposition into one 
district, the chance of defeat of the majority in the remaining 
districts may be lessened — or a small majority of the oppo- 
sition in one district may be overcome by adding to it a few 
townships strongly of the party of the majority. The follow- 
ing extract shows the conflicting interests at work in a redis- 
tribution of State legislature districts. 

Mr. Speer. The proposition reported by your Committee 
on Apportionment increases the Senate from thirty-two to fifty 
members and apportions the districts so that thirty-two will be 

1 Revised Record of the Constitutional Convention of New York. 1894; 
Vol. Ill, pp. 1083, 1 162; Vol. IV, p. 34 et seq. 



152 Readings on Parties and Elections 

Republican and eighteen Democratic, according to the approved 
estimates of the experts of your Republican majority, as pub- 
lished in the New York Press, a Republican organ. The as- 
sembly is increased from 128 to 150. Of this 150, ninety-one 
are to be Republicans and fifty-nine Democrats. Each House 
will be Republican by over three-fifths. This apportionment is 
of such a nature that should the Democrats carry the State by 
a majority of 120,000 they would not be able to control both 
Houses of the Legislature. 

Then you adopt the English idea, the plan on which members 
of Parliament were elected in England's most corrupt days, of 
giving representation to counties irrespective of population. 
What is there sacred about county lines that you should so in- 
sist upon them in your proposition and report ? The county of 
Putnam has a population of 13,325, a third of the number to 
entitle it to a Member of the Assembly, still you give Putnam 
county an Assemblyman. Is this because Putnam county is 
Republican? Schuyler county has 16,326 population, less than 
half the ratio you have fixed of 38,606. Is it to have an Assem- 
blyman because Schuyler county is Republican? 

You seek to appeal to prejudice to array the rural counties 
of the State against the cities. You aim at arousing the agri- 
cultural interests against the commercial and industrial. What 
an appeal ! What a spectacle you are making, not only to the 
residents of the cities, whom you chain hand and foot, but to the 
rural counties, whom you ask to vent on the cities the prejudice 
which you seek to arouse. Let us analyze this work of adroit 
partizanship which you have devised. You take the State Sen- 
ators of 1892, with the citizen population of the State, 5,790,865, 
and with fifty Senate districts make your ratio 115,817. On the 
basis of last fall's vote, it will require 28,926 Democrats to elect 
a Democratic State Senator and only 17,062 Republicans to 
elect a Republican State Senator. Three Republicans will have 
as much representation as five Democrats. Such an apportion- 
ment is a work of art. 



Elections to the House of Representatives 153 

Taking your own figures as printed in your report, Docu- 
ment No. 65, let us see where the districts which have more than 
the ratio, and where the districts which have less. In Kings 
county you have 58,264 citizens left over, enough to be entitled 
to another Senator, a robbery of one Democratic Senator in ad- 
dition to your gerrymander of the Brooklyn district. In every 
New York City district you have exceeded the ratio and dis- 
franchised 34,160 citizens. In Westchester county you have 
exceeded the ratio 13,407. In these three counties alone, all of 
them Democratic, your excess is over 100,000. . . 

Mr. Maybee. The basic idea of the whole scheme, the 
foundation upon which the whole scheme rests, is the great de- 
fect in this measure. It increases the number of Members of 
Assembly from 128 to 150; it increases the number of Senators 
from thirty-two to fifty, an increase of forty members of the 
Legislature, without any reason whatever. Will any gentleman 
tell me what good reason exists for this large increase in the mem- 
bership of the Legislature ? Has there been anywhere a demand 
for it ? Have the people, by petitions, through the columns of 
the newspapers anywhere, made a demand for this increase? 
What good purpose does it subserve? The purpose of it is 
political, and political only. There is no reason why an Assembly 
of 150 members will do the business of the State any better, any 
more satisfactorily than an Assembly of 128 members. There 
is no reason why a Senate of fifty members will do the business of 
the State with any greater satisfaction to the people of a State 
than a Senate of thirty-two members. 

It is a recognized principle in political history, which has be- 
come axiomatic, that the larger the constituency within a rea- 
sonable limit, the better representative will you get. This is 
not denied by any students of political history. This measure 
intends to narrow the constituencies, not to broaden them ; in- 
tends to make them smaller, and not larger ; and for a political 
purpose, and a political purpose only, contravenes the well- 
known theory of political history and political economy that a 



154 Readings on Parties and Elections 

large constituency is more apt to return a good member than a 
small one. Now, the Congress of the United States consists of 
about 350 members. Those members represent between sixty 
and seventy millions of people, and yet gentlemen upon the 
other side of the House say that 128 Members of Assembly are 
not enough in number to fitly and adequately represent about 
six millions of people. 

Mr. Choate. Mr. Chairman, it is not true that direct 
population, popular count, man for man, has ever been in this 
State the basis of representation in the Legislature. We are 
not a pure Democracy; we are not an impure Republic. We 
are a representative government so far as its legislative body 
and the dealing out of legislative powers are concerned. For 
the great offices of State, the Governor and other great officers, 
we vote man by man and the majority rules. In the highest ju- 
dicial court of the State we vote in the same way, popular sover- 
eignty, popular majority, or, at any rate, popular plurality. It 
has never been so, it never will be so, it never can be so, in re- 
spect to the Senate and Assembly. We must be represented by 
districts; we must be represented by counties; we must be 
represented by some form of territorial division. When my 
friends on this side of the chamber concede, as they must con- 
cede, that, they give away the whole of the argument which Mr. 
Osborn presented, based upon equal popular representation. 
Why, there is the little county of Putnam of his, with 13,000 
people and the adjoining county of Westchester with 127,000, 
that, according to his theory, ought to have ten times as much. 
Nobody has ever dreamed under this or any other apportion- 
ment, of giving it more than three times as much. 

What do the people of this State come to the Legislature for ? 
To make laws for the whole State ; to represent the whole State, 
and each part of the State is interested in the whole. My friend 
down here upon this side talked as if all the wealth accumulated 
in the city of New York ought to lie at the basis and foundation 
of apportionment. Who owns the magnificent harbor which is 



Elections to the House of Representatives 155 

the foundation of all her prosperity and those great rivers which 
meet to kiss each other at her door ? Why, the little county of 
Niagara might just as well claim to own for itself the Cataract 
of Niagara, that other wonder of the world at the other end of 
the State. No, sir, they come here representing these divisions, 
and the first rule always has been, and always will be, I believe, 
that each one of these divisions, these counties which have been 
formed as political divisions for the very purpose of being the 
centres of home rule, if you please, of local government, — every 
one of them has the right, and the equal right ; and if there were 
but sixty counties, if there were but sixty representatives, they 
must be distributed among these sixty counties, upon every 
doctrine that has ever prevailed in this State; and the little 
county of Putnam in that case would be entitled to the same 
number in that assembly as the great county of New York. 

Mr. Chairman, if you want to go, for example, to good Demo- 
cratic authority, I want to give you some on this doctrine in 
support of this proposition that is represented in this scheme; 
that is to say, that the greater the territorial extent of a little 
and poor county, the greater shall be its representation in the 
popular branch of the Legislature. Florida — is not that a good 
Democratic State? Did anybody ever hear of a Republican 
entering its borders except for the purpose of summer recreation 
or for the investigation of fraud? Florida says: "The repre- 
sentation in the House of Representatives shall be apportioned 
among the several counties as nearly as possible according to 
population ; provided, each county shall have one representative 
at large in the House of Representatives; and no county shall 
have more than three representatives." Think of that. 

Georgia — is not that a good Democratic State ? Here are 
States that are all of one way of thinking. Georgia apportions 
her one hundred and seventy-five representatives among the 
several counties thus: "To the six counties having the largest 
population, three each; to the twenty-six counties having the 
next largest population, two each; to the remaining one hun- 



156 Readings on Parties and Elections 

dred and five counties, one each. After each United States cen- 
sus, the General Assembly may change the above apportionment 
so as to give to the six largest counties three each ; to the twenty- 
six next largest, two each; but in no event shall the aggregate 
number of representatives be increased." Is that good Demo- 
cratic doctrine ? 

3. THE FEDERAL LAW REQUIRING SINGLE MEMBER DISTRICTS 
FOR THE ELECTION OF MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE OF REP- 
RESENTATIVES * 

Up to 1842, the states were free to adopt any method of 
popular election for the choice of their representatives in the 
lower house of Congress. Congress contented itself with pre- 
scribing only the number of representatives to which each state 
was entitled. Since 1842 the election is required to be by single 
member districts. When the number of representatives has 
been cut down but the legislature has not yet redistricted the 
state the elections are occasionally held under the old general 
ticket system. South Dakota does so regularly. 

Chap. XL VII. An Act for the apportionment of Represent- 
atives among the several States according to the sixth census. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
the United States of America in Congress assembled, That from 
and after the third day of March, one thousand eight hundred 
and forty-three, the House of Representatives shall be composed 
of members elected agreeably to a ratio of one Representative 
for every seventy thousand six hundred and eighty persons in 
each State, and of one additional representative for each State 
having a fraction greater than one moiety of the said ratio, com- 
puted according to the rule prescribed by the Constitution of 
the United States ; that is to say : Within the State of Maine, 
seven ; within the State of New Hampshire, four ; within the 
State of Massachusetts, ten ; within the State of Rhode Island, 

1 United States Statutes at Large. Vol. V, p. 491 ; June 25, 1842. 



Elections to the House of Representatives 157 

two ; within the State of Connecticut, four ; within the State of 
Vermont, four; within the State of New York, thirty-four; 
within the state of New Jersey, five ; within the State of Pennsyl- 
vania, twenty-four ; within the State of Delaware, one ; within 
the State of Maryland, six ; within the State of Virginia, fifteen ; 
within the State of North Carolina, nine; within the State 
of South Carolina, seven; within the State of Georgia, eight; 
within the State of Alabama, seven ; within the State of Louisi- 
ana, four; within the State of Mississippi, four; within the 
State of Tennessee, eleven ; within the State of Kentucky, ten ; 
within the State of Ohio, twenty-one; within the State of 
Indiana, ten; within the State of Illinois, seven; within the 
State of Missouri, five ; within the State of Arkansas, one ; and 
within the State of Michigan, three. 

Sec. 2. And be it further enacted, That in every case where 
a State is entitled to more than one Representative, the number 
to which each State shall be entitled under this apportionment 
shall be elected by districts composed of contiguous territory 
equal in number to the number of Representatives to which said 
State may be entitled, no one district electing more than one 
Representative. 

Approved, June 25, 1842. 

4. CONSTITUTIONAL LIMITATIONS ON APPORTIONMENTS l 

The Federal law requiring that Representatives should be 
elected from single member districts of approximately equal 
population has been accompanied by constitutional provisions 
in the states applying to both congressional and state legisla- 
tive districts. The character and efficiency of those provisions 
is discussed below. 

In order to limit the discretion of legislatures in the matter of 
apportionment and to oblige them to make a more equitable 

1 Reinsch, P. S., American Legislatures and Legislative Methods. Century 
Co., New York, 1907; pp. 204-213. 



158 Readings on Parties and Elections 

division of the electorate, strict constitutional provisions have 
in many states been adopted. A good example of a detailed 
regulation is found in the New York constitution of 1895 (Art. 
3, Sec. 2). This constitution provides that the Senate shall con- 
sist of fifty members, the Assembly of 150; that the apportion- 
ment is to be changed by the legislature after the enumeration of 
1905 and every ten years thereafter. The senate districts are 
to contain as nearly equal a number of inhabitants as may be ; 
they are to be compact in form, consisting of contiguous territory. 
No county is to be divided save to make two or more Senate dis- 
tricts wholly within such county. No county is to have more 
than one-third of all the senators, or any two adjoining counties 
more than one-half. If a county having three or more senators 
is entitled to a greater number, the senators allotted to it shall 
be given in addition to the fifty already provided for. Each 
county, with one exception, is entitled to at least one member of 
the Assembly ; in the counties entitled to more than one member, 
the Board of Supervisors or the Common Council make the ap- 
portionment. But each Assembly district must be wholly within 
a Senate district, and no township or city block is to be divided. 
Legislative apportionment is subject to review by the Court of 
Appeals at the suit of any citizen. 

The New York Court of Appeals had before this shown itself 
rather reluctant to interfere with the legislative discretion in 
matters of apportionment. Great inequalities had existed under 
the later acts. Thus the act of 1879 gave one representative to 
Suffolk County with 50,330 inhabitants; two to Cattaraugus 
with only 45,737, and three to St. Lawrence with 78,014. Gov- 
ernor Robinson spoke of these inequalities as admitting of no 
apology or excuse. But he was powerless in the matter, since a 
veto of the law would have left the still more objectionable act 
of 1866 in force. Under the act of 1892 also there were some 
glaring inequalities ; the Twelfth senate district had only 105,- 
720 inhabitants, the adjoining Thirteenth 241,138. This time 
St. Lawrence with 80,679 inhabitants received only one assem- 



Elections to the House of Representatives 159 

blyman, while Dutchess with 75,078 received two, and 
Albany with 156,748 received four. The Court of Appeals, 
which was called upon to decide on the constitutionality of this 
act, refused to interfere with the discretion of the legislature. 
(People ex rel. Carter v. Rice, 135 N.Y., 473 (1892). The 
principle upon which the Court based its decision was stated in 
the following language: "The discretion necessarily vested in 
the legislature must be finally disposed of by it, unless there is 
such an abuse of that discretion as to clearly show an open and 
intended violation of the letter and spirit of the Constitution." 
The Court was also strongly impressed with questions of expedi- 
ence in the situation, as is apparent from the argument in the 
opinion, that the effect of setting aside an apportionment act 
would be to cause every subsequent act to be brought before the 
courts for review, which might happen at a critical time; to 
originate the greatest confusion at the impending election with 
a possible total suppression of it ; and at all events to continue 
in force an act containing greater inequalities than the one 
attacked. These considerations were sufficient to induce the 
Court to say that "only in a case of plain and gross violation 
of the spirit and letter of the Constitution should it exercise the 
power." 

The Supreme Court of Illinois has been similarly disinclined 
to interfere with legislative apportionments. (People ex rel. 
Woodyatt v. Thompson, 155 111., 451 (1895).) It held that 
the courts cannot inquire into the motives which have 
influenced the legislature in making an apportionment. If 
the constitutional requirements of compactness of territory 
and equality of population have been applied at all, the 
Court will not interfere, though the nearest possible approxi- 
mation to these requirements may not have been attained. The 
Court held that an act apportioning senatorial districts is un- 
constitutional, if it appears that the constitutional requirements 
of compactness of territory and equality in population have been 
wholly ignored, and not considered or applied to any extent. 



160 Readings on Parties and Elections 

But if considered and applied, although to a limited extent only, 
subject to the more definite limitations, the act is constitutional, 
although the legislature may have imperfectly performed its 
duty. . . . " As the courts cannot make a senatorial apportion- 
ment directly, neither can they do so indirectly. There is a 
vast difference between determining whether the principle of 
compactness of territory has been applied at all or not, and 
whether or not the nearest practical approximation to perfect 
compactness has been obtained. The first is a question for the 
courts to determine ; the latter is for the legislature." 

The Supreme Court of Kansas in an earlier case leaves con- 
siderable discretion to the legislature in the matter of appor- 
tionment. (Prouty v. Stover, n Kans., 235; 1873.) Justice 
Brewer says, in giving the opinion of the Court, — "An appor- 
tionment cannot be overthrown because the representatives are 
not distributed with mathematical accuracy, according to the 
population. Something must be left to the discretion of the 
legislature, and it may, without invalidating the apportionment, 
make one district of a larger population than another. It may 
rightfully consider the compactness of territory, the density of 
population, and also, we think, the probable changes of the fu- 
ture in making the distribution of representatives." A most 
extreme position was taken by the Supreme Court of Appeals of 
Virginia (Wise v. Bigger, 79 Va., 1884) in declaring that "the 
laying off and defining the congressional districts is the exercise 
of a political and discretionary power of the legislature, for which 
they are amenable to the people whose representatives they 
are." This opinion, which was given by the Court without 
any discussion of the question, was declared although specific 
constitutional restrictions upon the legislative power had been 
invoked. 

Courts in other jurisdictions have recently taken a more de- 
cisive stand against the abuse of legislative discretion in dis- 
tricting the state for electoral purposes. The state of Michigan 
suffered a good deal from frequent unscrupulous gerrymandering, 



Elections to tfee House of Representatives 161 

as the constitution did not prescribe a definite period of ap- 
portionment. The Republicans in 1885, and the Democrats in 
1 89 1, in the first case upon a majority of less than 4,000 in a 
total vote of 400,000, so gerrymandered the senatorial districts 
as to yield their own party twenty-one senators and their op- 
ponents eleven. Under the apportionment of 1891, eight coun- 
ties with a population of 40,000 were formed into a district hav- 
ing one senator, and nine adjoining counties with 97,000 inhab- 
itants were given the same representation. Both of the acts 
mentioned were held unconstitutional by the Supreme Court, 
which decided among other things that it was not a due exercise 
of legislative discretion under the constitution, to give a county 
of less population than another greater representation, and that 
the discretion of the legislature must be honestly exercised so as 
to preserve the equality of representation as nearly as may be. 
(Supervisors of Houghton County v. Blacker, 92 Mich., 638. 
Giddings v. Blacker, 93 Mich., 1 ; 1892). The judges, in their 
written opinions, used very strong language in denouncing the 
practice of gerrymandering. Chief Justice Morse declared that 
the courts alone could in this matter save the rights of the people 
and assure them of equality in representation ; and another jus- 
tice said, " Such laws breed disrespect for all law, for law makers 
become law breakers." 

The Supreme Court of Wisconsin has taken especially ad- 
vanced ground in enforcing constitutional limitations upon the 
discretion of the legislature. (State ex ret. Attorney General v. 
Cunningham, 81 Wis., 440.) The court decided that "an ap- 
portionment act may be judicially declared void for violation of 
a constitutional requirement of apportionment according to the 
number of inhabitants, when the disparity in their numbers, in 
the districts created, is so great that it cannot possibly be jus- 
tified as an exercise of judgment or discretion. A constitu- 
tional requirement of apportionment according to the number 
of inhabitants in creating assembly and senate districts, is vio- 
lated by an apportionment act in which, with the average popu- 



1 62 Readings on Parties and Elections 

lation of 51,117 for a senate district, the number of inhabitants 
in the respective districts created ranges from 37,000 to 68,000 ; 
and in the assembly districts, with an average of 16,868, it ranges 
from 6,000 to 38,000. Such an act is not an 'apportionment' 
in any sense of the word, but is a direct and palpable violation 
of the constitution, bearing upon its face intrinsic evidence that 
no judgment or discretion was exercised in an attempt to comply 
with the constitution. The whole act must be held void if con- 
stitutional requirements are violated in the formation of some 
of the districts." In the second case the court decided that "any 
number of legislative violations of plain and unambiguous con- 
stitutional provisions regarding the apportionment of legislative 
districts cannot be regarded as abrogating such provisions. . . . 
The unnecessary inequalities under the apportionment of July, 
1892, such as one assembly district having three times the popu- 
lation of another or one senate district having double that of 
another, are held to render the act invalid." 

The supreme court of Indiana in the same year also announced 
the doctrine of a stricter limitation of legislative discretion. 
(Parker v. State, 133 Ind., 178, 1892.) It held in substance: 
"The legislature has no discretion to make an apportionment in 
disregard to the enumeration of inhabitants authorized to vote, 
as provided for in the constitution ; and because exact equality 
is not possible, the general assembly is not excused from making 
such an apportionment as will approximate the equality re- 
quired by the constitution. This rule forbids the formation of 
districts containing large fractions unrepresented where it is 
possible to avoid it, while other districts are largely over-repre- 
sented. While the general assembly has much discretion in dis- 
posing of the fractions of the unit of representation, yet it is not 
beyond control. No scheme for senatorial districts can be law- 
fully devised in which a county having less than the unit of popu- 
lation for a senatorial district can legally be entitled to vote for 
two senators, where the constitutional provisions require equal- 
ity in representation. A county having more than the repre- 



Elections to the House of Representatives 163 

sentative unit of population cannot be denied the right to a 
separate representative." 

In deciding upon questions of apportionment the courts often 
face a difficult problem in the fact that by declaring the act un- 
der consideration void, the state is left at the mercy of still more 
intolerable conditions under earlier acts. In the Michigan cases 
of 1892, the supreme court held void not only the apportionment 
of 1891, but also the act of 1885, under which three elections had 
been held.; and prescribed that election notices should be issued 
by the secretary of state under the old law of 1881, unless a new 
and valid apportionment should be made by the legislature. In 
the Wisconsin cases the court took cognizance of electoral con- 
ditions, but, refusing to be influenced by them, declared only 
the act before it invalid. It did not investigate the earlier acts 
as to constitutionality, although the separate opinions show 
that these acts were in the same class with the law held void. 
The court, however, did suggest action by extra session, as al- 
ternative to elections under a previous act. While the supreme 
court of Michigan decided the Michigan acts of 1891 and 1885 
both unconstitutional, the Indiana court declared contrary to 
the constitution two acts of 1891 and 1879, hut refused to con- 
sider the constitutionality of the act of 1885, as this question 
had not been brought before it. This matter was given careful 
consideration by the New York court of appeals, but an oppo- 
site conclusion was arrived at ; the very fact that the earlier acts 
were also contrary to the constitution was made a reason for up- 
holding the act before the court. Regarding this subject, Jus- 
tice Peckham used the following language : (People ex rel. 
Carter v. Rice, 135 N.Y., 509). "If the act of 1892 is void, the 
act of 1879 is also plainly void and no election of members of the 
assembly should be tolerated under it. This might relegate the 
people to the act of 1866, and thus we might have an attempt at 
an election for members of the assembly under an act a quarter 
of a century old and a legislative representation of the people of 
that time. This would be a travesty on the laws and upon all 



164 Readings on Parties and Elections 

ideas of equality, propriety and justice. We are compelled to 
the conclusion that this act of 1892 successfully withstands all 
assaults upon it and is a valid and effective law." 

In order to eliminate the evils accompanying the present sys- 
tem of apportionment, with its strong temptation to gerryman- 
der, various alternative plans have been proposed. They have, 
however, not as yet been proven in practice to possess the reme- 
dial virtues urged in their behalf. According to the customary 
attitude among the people, a great deal of attention has been 
devoted to the effects of the present inadequate system, while 
comparatively little has been paid to its source. The pallia- 
tives that have been suggested include elections at large, ap- 
portionment by congressional action, cumulative voting and the 
quota system of proportional representation ; but while admit- 
ting the special advantages of each, it is not clearly evident that 
any one of the proposed changes would completely bring about 
the desired result of fair and equal representation of interests 
and sections as well as of population. 

5. SOME TYPES OF PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION * 

If parties, not territorial units, are entitled to representa- 
tion, it is essential that some electoral machinery should be 
adopted which will provide representation based on the rela- 
tive number of votes cast by each party throughout the electoral 
district. This is the object of all methods of Proportional rep- 
resentation. Though such plans are just beginning to attract 
attention in the United States, they have received various appli- 
cations in Europe and Australia and merit the attention of Ameri- 
can political reformers. 

Proportional] sts in the recent past have had for their most 
formidable difficulty a want of agreement concerning the plan, 
method, or system to be presented in propaganda. They were 
agreed as to the proportional principle, but differed about pro- 
portional practise. 

1 Robert Tyson, "The Single Transferable Vote." Equity, Jan., 1911. 



Elections to the House of Representatives 165 

This difficulty is gradually being overcome by recent develop- 
ments, and now a basis of agreement is prominently to the front, 
well described by the title which heads this article : " The Single 
Transferable Vote." It is a most happy phrase, for it covers 
three essentials on which a large body of proportionalists are 
agreed, whilst leaving room for variations in the method of trans- 
fer, so as to meet any disagreements in this respect. 

The three essential points agreed upon by the great body of 
English-speaking proportionalists are these: (a) an electoral 
district from which several members are elected; (b) one final 
vote only for each elector ; and (c) some method of transferring 
votes from candidates who cannot use them to candidates who 
can. 

There are just four systems which embody these essential 
points. Or, to put it in another way, there are just four varia- 
tions of the Single Transferable Vote. Briefly, here they are, 
with some short notes on each : 

1. The Hare or Hare-S 'pence System. I put this first, be- 
cause it is the most widely adopted in actual practise, being used 
in Tasmania, South Africa, Denmark and elsewhere. Ballots 
are marked first choice, second choice, etc., by the electors. 
First choices are tallied and sorted at " precincts" or " polling 
subdivisions." At the close of the poll, all ballots are taken 
to the central office. A "quota" is got on the general principle 
of dividing the total vote by the number of seats to be filled. 
Then the transfers are made on the basis of the choices marked 
by the electors. If a candidate has surplus votes, over and 
above the quota, they are evidently votes which he has no use 
for, and they are transferred away from him. Then the candi- 
dates weakest in votes are excluded, one by one, and their bal- 
lots transferred. This process is continued until only enough 
candidates remain to fill the seats. Let me repeat that all trans- 
fers are made according to the wishes of the electors, as expressed 
by the "choices" marked on their ballots. 

It is an excellent system; its advantages are well known; 



1 66 Readings on Parties and Elections 

and it has worked well in practise. The objections urged 
against it are : (a) there is a good deal of elaboration involved 
in a fully satisfactory distribution of the surplus votes ; (b) 
the ballots have all to be taken to one central point for transfer. 

2. The Schedule Plan. This is the simplest form of the Sin- 
gle Transferable Vote, and I put it second because of its close 
analogy to the Hare system. 

After nomination and before election each candidate publishes 
and officially files a preferential schedule, setting out those other 
candidates to whom he instructs shall be transferred his surplus 
votes, if any, or all his votes if he cannot be elected. Each elec- 
tor marks his ballot for one candidate only. Returns from the 
precincts are sent to the central office; a quota is ascertained; 
and transfers are made on the same principle as in the Hare sys- 
tem, but on the basis of candidates' schedules, instead of accord- 
ing to the voter's marking of choices, which he does not do under 
this plan. It is suggested that provision should be made for 
the voter, by his ballot, to reject his candidate's schedule if he 
does not approve of it, thereby confining himself to a first-choice 
vote only, and taking the risk of that vote staying with a losing 
candidate. 

The advantages of the schedule method are its extreme sim- 
plicity, and the fact that the ballots are not required at a cen- 
tral office for counting the votes. 

Objections urged are (a) that the voter, not the candidate, 
ought to determine the transfers; (b) that the making of a pref- 
erential list would be embarrassing to candidates — and (c) 
that the system is nowhere in use for municipal or legislative 
elections. 

3. The Proxy Plan. I give here but a mere outline. Elec- 
tors mark on their ballots several candidates in the order of their 
choice, precisely as in the Hare system. First-choice votes are 
sorted and tallied at precincts. All ballots and tally sheets are 
taken to a central office. No quota is got, and there are no 
" surplus votes" to deal with. As soon as the total first-choice 



Elections to the House of Representatives 167 

votes for each candidate are ascertained, the process begins of 
excluding the weakest candidates, one by one, and transferring 
their votes according to the wishes of the electors as expressed 
on each ballot, until only the required number of candidates re- 
main. On these candidates have been concentrated all the votes 
east ; some having received, of course, many more votes than 
others. Then each candidate is empowered, on a division in 
council or legislature, to cast as many votes as have been cast 
for him at his election. 

Advantages of the proxy plan are its simplicity and that it 
may operate to give representation to more groups of electors 
than the other plans. 

Objections are : (a) that mere votes on a division are not 
the only thing required, but personnel counts also ; and (b) that 
the system has never been tried for municipal or legislative 
elections. 

4. The Single Vote Free List. This plan comes under the full 
scope of our heading only by reason of an indirect transfer. The 
candidates are arranged on the ballot in party lists, and each 
voter has one vote only. I will not go farther into detail, be- 
cause the general plan of list systems is fairly well known, . . 

The advantages are, considerable simplicity; a compliance 
with present electoral habits of the United States; the ballots 
need not be taken to a central office for the purpose of the final 
count ; its successful use in Belgium for six successive parlia- 
mentary elections; and its advocacy by the People's Power 
League of the state of Oregon. An ingenious improvement of 
detail has been suggested in Oregon, which would remove the 
difficulty heretofore experienced in dealing with the fractions of 
quotas which arise in dividing each list by the quota. 

The objections urged against all list plans are : (a) they 
strengthen and perpetuate the permanent partizan party feeling ; 
(b) they give party organizations too much power in nomina- 
tions; and (c) they afford too little scope for the preferences of 
the individual elector in his choice of a candidate. 



1 68 Readings on Parties and Elections 

General Comment. There is no doubt that so far the Hare 
system is ahead in the race, not only by reason of its use in Den- 
mark, Tasmania and South Africa, but because it is being pushed 
by a powerful and active organization in Great Britain, which 
has held three successful test elections on a large scale. Another 
thing which helps the Hare plan is its peculiar adaptability, in 
its simpler form, for use in meeting-room elections of clubs, 
associations, etc. I confess to being much attracted by the sim- 
plicity of both the Schedule System and the Proxy Plan ; and I 
should very much like to see one or both tried on a large scale. 



VII. Party Organization 

I. PARTY REGULARITY 1 

The importance of securing united action is so great that 
the party is able to override or at least silence any objection 
within the ranks after the policy has been determined upon by 
the majority, or too often by the leaders who assume to stand 
for the majority. Only in extraordinary cases will the rank and 
file break away from the party with which they have become 
accustomed to vote. 

Since it lacks a true representative character, and its concern 
in public affairs is at bottom a business pursuit carried on for 
personal gain and emolument, the service which party performs 
in executing the behests of public opinion and in carrying on politi- 
cal development must be an incident in its ordinary activity. 
That this is the case all observation confirms. It is a common 
remark, that all political parties seem to care for is the possession 
of the offices, and that they are willing to shift and change their 
principles as much as need be in order to win. Talleyrand's 
cynical remark, that a man who is always true to his party must 
be prepared to change his principles frequently, is peculiarly 
applicable to American politics. Party effrontery is carried to 
such a pitch that in one state a party may take up and energeti- 
cally advocate doctrines, which the same party in another state 
will be just as actively engaged in denouncing and opposing. 
So accommodating is party policy in this respect, that s' ate polit- 
ical campaigns have become tests of the public disposition, and 
the results of such experimentation are studied for data upon 

1 Ford, H. J., Rise and Growth of American Politics. Macmillan, New 
York, 1900; pp. 325-333- 

169 



170 Readings on Parties and Elections 

which to base plans for the grand quadrennial adventure of the 
presidential election. 

It therefore appears that wherein party serves public interests 
is in the catering to public wants and desires which every party 
organization must carry on to get and hold business in compe- 
tition with opposing party organization. Hence party is obliged 
to consult public opinion and assume engagements to be carried 
out in the administration of public affairs. American politics 
are not peculiar in this respect, for that is the way in which party 
discharges its function wherever it carries on the government. 
What is peculiar to American politics is that party organization 
is so situated that it cannot negotiate as a principal but as a 
go-between. Unlike an English party, it cannot itself formulate 
measures, direct the course of legislation, and assume the direct 
responsibility of administration. All that it can do is to certify 
the political complexion of candidates, leaving it to be inferred 
that their common purpose will effect such unity of action as 
will control legislation and direct administration in accordance 
with party professions. The peculiarities of American party 
government are all due to this separation of party management 
from direct and immediate responsibility for the administration 
of government. Party organization is compelled to act through 
executive and legislative deputies, who, while always far from 
disavowing their party obligations, are quite free to use their 
own discretion as to the way in which they shall interpret and 
fulfil the party pledges. Meanwhile they are shielded, by the 
constitutional partitions of -privilege and distributions of author- 
ity, from any direct and specific responsibility for delay or fail- 
ure in coming to an agreement for the accomplishment of party 
purposes. Authority being divided, responsibility is uncertain 
and confused, and the accountability of the government to the 
people is not at all definite or precise. When a party meets with 
disaster at the polls, every one may form his own opinion as to 
the cause. It is purely a matter of speculation. The situation 
of affairs is one which was accurately foretold in The Federalist. 



Party Organization 171 

"It is often impossible," said Hamilton, "amidst mutual ac- 
cusations, to determine on whom the blame or the punishment 
of a pernicious measure, or series of pernicious measures, ought 
really to fall. It is shifted from one to another with so much 
dexterity, and under such plausible appearances, that the public 
opinion is left in suspense about the real author. The circum- 
stances which may have led to any national miscarriage or mis- 
fortune are sometimes so complicated that where there are a 
number of actors who may have had different degrees and kinds 
of agency, though we may clearly see upon the whole that there 
has been mismanagement, yet it may be impracticable to pro- 
nounce to whose account the evil which may have been incurred 
is truly chargeable." 

As a natural consequence of the detached and subordinate 
position of party organization in the conduct of the government, 
public opinion is not concentrated upon its acts with steady scru- 
tiny and vigilant supervision. The activity of party is largely 
concerned with details of its own business management, not 
possessing much interest for the mass of the people who have 
their own affairs to attend to. Its contentions are largely per- 
sonal squabbles, whose political results may be very important, 
but which do not themselves present political issues. They are 
like the intrigues which used to go on among the English gentry, 
over court honors and official emoluments, in the Georgian era 
of English politics, the mass of the electorate but dimly com- 
prehending what was going on and regarding the strife with dis- 
gust and aversion, although quickly roused to activity by 
issues appealing to their political instincts. The true public 
opinion of the nation is ordinarily in a state of suspense. The 
minds of people are preoccupied by too many interests to attend 
closely to the transactions of the politicians, and not until the 
issue is thrust upon the public in a definite form by some pressing 
emergency is the genuine expression of public opinion evoked. 
Meanwhile the political opinion with which party organization 
is concerned, and to which it defers, is that with which it comes 



172 Readings on Parties and Elections 

in contact soliciting business. The acrid and fretting humors 
of the body politic exert a more direct and active influence 
upon party behavior than the judgment and intelligence of the 
nation, because elements of unrest and dissatisfaction are im- 
portunate in their demands and therefore receive attention, 
while social interests of incomparably greater magnitude are 
ignored. 

The readiness with which party organization lends itself to 
the service of temporary manias and recognized delusions pro- 
ceeds from an instinct of self-preservation. Everywhere the ins 
are menanced by the activity of the outs, prompt to seize upon 
any whim, passion, or prejudice, no matter how foolish or nox- 
ious, if it can be turned to present account. Party organization, 
therefore, exploits outbreaks of popular folly and knavery, and 
caters to the prejudices of ignorance and fanaticism in a way 
that invests them with fictitious importance, and confers upon 
them inordinate legislative influence. This feature of American 
politics, more than any other, causes the national character to 
be misunderstood, and the worth of democratic institutions to be 
undervalued. It is inferred that public opinion in this country 
is subject to periodical hallucinations, that there is a popular 
contempt of authority, and a frequent recurrence of reckless de- 
sires to try over again the old failures, heedless of the abundant 
instructions of history and the warnings of our national experi- 
ence. This is a mistake. Folly does not more abound, but it 
is magnified in force and effect by the peculiar conditions of 
American politics. American citizenship is probably superior 
in average intelligence to that of any other country. The pub- 
lic press, although considerate of the value of party goodwill to an 
extent that unfits it for fairly representing public opinion, must 
nevertheless keep that in view, since it caters to the public at 
large, and not merely to the fraction which busies itself with 
politics ; and it is well known that the voice of the press is differ- 
ent from the voice of party on questions of public policy. Sanity 
and conservatism prevail in the tone of the press, even when 



Party Organization 173 

party organization is most supple and accommodating to the 
folly of the hour. 

Party organization not being directly burdened by the diffi- 
culties and necessities of government feels at liberty to court 
public opinion in all its vagaries. Great art is employed in 
framing platforms so as to be susceptible to various interpreta- 
tions. Concerning issues which are settled, party speaks in a 
clear, sonorous voice. But on new issues it mumbles and quibbles. 
Subdivisions of the party organization make such professions as 
will pay the best in their respective fields of activity. If the 
issue cannot be dodged, straddling may be resorted to. Declara- 
tions really incongruous in their nature are coupled, and their 
inconsistency is cloaked by rhetorical artifice. Sometimes such 
expedients are employed as making the platform lean one way 
and putting on it a candidate who leans the other way, or candi- 
dates representing opposing ideas and tendencies are put upon 
the same ticket. Such practices are results of the ordinary in- 
stincts of party in all countries, and obtain such monstrous 
growth in America because of extraordinarily favorable condi- 
tions. Party never commits itself to any new undertaking until 
it has to. In England there must be a long period of agitation 
and education of public sentiment before a new issue is raised 
to the rank of what is known as a cabinet question, but when 
that time arrives, party is in a position to enter into exact and 
specific engagements as to the disposition which will be made of 
it. In this country the only way in which party can be forced 
into such a position is through the exigencies of the national 
administration. Whatever may be the policy then adopted, it 
puts upon party the necessity of acquiescence or dissent in a way 
that requires a categorical response to the demands of public 
opinion. 

In the discharge of this function national party organiza- 
tion claims and exercises supreme jurisdiction. When it reaches 
its decision, all indulgence of local heterodoxy disappears and is 
succeeded by a ferocious intolerance. State and local party lead- 



174 Readings on Parties and Elections 

ers must submit on penalty of excommunication. The coercive 
force which party organization then develops was strikingly 
manifested by the way in which the Democratic platform of 
1896 was forced upon dissenting state party organizations. 
Some, which had adopted platforms antagonistic to the plat- 
form of the national party, were compelled to meet and eat their 
words. It is the established principle of American politics that 
fidelity to the national platform is the crucial test of party ortho- 
doxy. Hence national issues are the controlling force in poli- 
tics. Attempting to reform state or local politics, while ignoring 
national politics, is like expecting to accomplish a local purifica- 
tion of the atmosphere by palisading a patch of ground in a 
swamp. A little may be done, but not much. It follows that, 
in this country, — as was the case in England, — the effectual 
purification of our politics will begin with national politics and 
will spread from them to local politics. 

The pliable and time-serving disposition of party, whjch is 
the natural consequence of its own anxious calculation of its 
business interests, prepares for its tremendous reverses. It be- 
comes committed to methods of administration and courses of 
policy inimical to the public interest, so that there comes a time 
when genuine public opinion is roused to action with a vigor 
which nothing can withstand. The shelters of falsehood and 
the refuges of deceit are swept away, as by the blast of a hurri- 
cane, and the discomfited party managers lie choking and dum- 
founded in the dust and the wreckage. The readiness of the 
people to treat their great national parties in this way must 
eventually beat those parties into serviceable tools of govern- 
ment or break them up to make room for better material. The 
situation confronts political leaders with problems of party con- 
trol and discipline, whose solution tends to improve the appara- 
tus of government. The results of this tendency are already very 
plainly marked in the improvement of the House of Representa- 
tives ; but far more extensive changes must take place in all the 
organs of government before the rule of public opinion is defi- 



Party Organization 175 

nitely established. The present inadequacy of party organiza- 
tion for a true representation of public opinion is so exasperating 
to impatient reformers that they would like to shatter it to bits ; 
but that is not the way to better the state of affairs. Party 
rises to new occasions by consulting its own interests. This 
consultative faculty in party organization, mischievous as seems 
to be its irregular and irresponsible operation, is that which sus- 
tains political development, and eventually it will perfect the 
democratic type of government. 

2. WHAT THE PARTY MACHINE HAS TO DO 1 

The enormous amount of routine work done by the party 
organization in the United States is done quietly and attracts 
but little public attention. It extends all through the year and 
requires organizing ability of the highest order. 

In Europe a citizen rarely votes more than twice or thrice a 
year, sometimes less often, and usually for only one person at a 
time. Thus in England any householder, say at Manchester or 
Liverpool, votes once a year for a town councillor (if there is a 
contest in his ward) ; once in four years (on an average) for a 
member of the House of Commons. Allowing for the frequent 
cases in which there is no municipal contest in his ward, he will 
not on an average vote more than once and a half times each 
year. It is much the same in Scotland, nor do elections seem to 
be more frequent in France, Germany, or Italy, or even perhaps 
in Switzerland. 

In the United States, however, the number of elective offices 
is so enormous and the terms of office usually so short that the 
voter is not only very frequently called upon to go to the polls, 
but has a very large number of candidates placed before him 
from among whom he must choose those whom he prefers. 
Moreover, besides voting at the regular election, he ought also 

1 Bryce, J., The American Commonwealth. Macmillan, New York, 1910; 
Vol. II, pp. 93-100. 



176 Readings on Parties and Elections 

to vote at primaries, i.e. to vote to select the candidates from 
among whom he is subsequently to choose those whom he desires 
to have as officers ; while in many States the law now fixes the 
day and manner in which he ought to do so. . . 

The first thing that strikes a European who contemplates the 
party organization which works this elaborate elective system is 
the great mass of work it has to do. In Ohio, for instance, there 
are, if we count in such unpaid offices as are important in the 
eyes of politicians, on an average of more than twenty offices to 
be filled annually by election. Primaries or conventions have 
to select candidates for all of these. Managing committees have 
to organize the primaries, "run" the conventions, conduct the 
elections. Here is ample occupation for a professional class. 

What are the results which one may expect this abundance of 
offices and elections to produce ? 

Where the business is that of selecting delegates and, in the 
particular State, the selection of candidates is made by the older 
kind of primaries and conventions, it will be hard to find an ade- 
quate number of men of any mark or superior intelligence to act 
as delegates. The bulk will be persons unlikely to possess, still 
more unlikely to exercise, a careful or independent judgment. 
The function of delegate being in the case of most conventions 
humble and uninteresting, because the offices are unattractive 
to good men, persons whose time is valuable will not, even if 
they do exist in sufficient numbers, seek it. Hence the best 
citizens, i.e. the men of position and intelligence, will leave the 
field open to inferior persons who have any private or personal 
reason for desiring to become delegates. I do not mean to imply 
that there is necessarily any evil in this as regards most of the 
offices, but mention the fact to explain why few men of good so- 
cial position think of the office of delegate, except to the National 
Convention once in four years, as one of trust or honour. 

If on the other hand the new statutory primaries have in the 
particular state superseded conventions, then the attendance at 
these primaries and the choice of candidates there is a serious 



Party Organization 177 

task thrown on the voter for which his knowledge of the persons 
from whom candidates are to be selected may be quite 
inadequate. . . 

The number of places to be rilled by election being very large, 
ordinary citizens will find it hard to form an opinion as to the 
men best qualified for the offices. Their minds will be distracted 
among the multiplicity of places. In large cities particularly, 
where people know little about their neighbors, the names of 
most candidates will be unknown to them, and there will be no 
materials, except the recommendation of a party organization, 
available for determining the respective fitness of the candidates 
put forward by the several parties. . . 

Those who have had experience of public meetings know that 
to make them go off well, it is as desirable to have the proceed- 
ings prearranged as it is to have a play rehearsed. You must 
select beforehand not only your chairman, but also your speakers. 
Your resolutions must be ready framed ; you must be prepared 
to meet the case of an adverse resolution or hostile amendment. 
This is still more advisable where the meeting is intended to 
transact some business, instead of merely expressing its opinion ; 
and when certain persons are to be selected for any duty, pre- 
arrangement becomes not merely convenient but indispensable 
in the interests of the meeting itself, and of the business which 
it has to dispatch. "Does not prearrangement practically cur- 
tail the freedom of the meeting ? " Certainly it does. But the 
alternative is confusion and a hasty unconsidered decision. 
Crowds need to be led ; if you do not lead them they will go 
astray, will follow the most plausible speaker, will break into frac- 
tions and accomplish nothing. Hence if a primary of the older 
type is to discharge properly its function of selecting candidates 
for office or a number of delegates to a nominating convention, it 
is necessary to have a list of candidates or delegates settled be- 
forehand. And for the reasons already given, the more numer- 
ous the offices and the delegates, the less interesting the duties 
they have to discharge, so much the more necessary is it to have 

N 



178 Readings on Parties and Elections 

such lists settled; and so much the more likely to be accepted 
by those present is the list proposed. On the other hand the 
new statutory primary intended to secure the freedom of the 
voter is also so complex a matter that preliminary steps must 
be taken by experts familiar with the law and practice govern- 
ing it. 

3. HOW THE PARTY IS ORGANIZED 1 

A large part of the work of the party near election time 
is the listing of the voters, and the establishment of their right 
to vote through proper registration. 

Let us see how the politician goes to work to carry an elec- 
tion. . . 

As I write, I have before me some pages from the poll-books 
and check-books of one of the county committees in the State of 
New York. Before registration day a thorough canvass is made 
of each election district. The names of all of the voters are ar- 
ranged in these poll-books alphabetically. After the column of 
names comes a series of columns headed, respectively, Republi- 
can, Democrat, Prohibition, Doubtful, Post-office Address, 
Occupation, and Remarks. Each voter's address is taken, and 
opposite his name is placed a mark in the proper column showing 
whether he is a regular Republican, a Democrat, or a Prohibition 
voter, or whether he is to be considered a "doubtful." After 
registration day, each man who registers has his name checked 
in the poll-book, so that the committees of both parties have a 
complete list of all those entitled to vote in each district. From 
this book, then, a check-book is prepared. In this second book, 
if I take as an example the check-book of the Republican party, 
on each page will be arranged in the first place, alphabetically 
the names of all the Republicans in the district ; then in a column 

1 Jenks, J. W., " Money in Practical Politics." Century, Vol. 44, 1892 ; 
p. 941. 



Party Organization 179 

below, or on another page, all those that are considered doubtful ; 
that is, those whose politics are not known, arid those whose votes 
it is thought possible to bring to the Republican party either by 
persuasion or by purchase. The Democratic committees have 
books similarly arranged, with the names of all the sound Demo- 
crats and of the "doubtful "... 

On election day, then, it is an easy matter for the poll-book 
holder, standing by the polls, to check the name of every reli- 
able party man as he comes to vote, and near the end of the day 
to find out how many men of his own party have not yet voted. 
He can then readily send a messenger to bring in any late or 
careless voters, the character of whose votes is not doubtful. 
The workers of each party, having thus a complete list of all 
doubtful or purchasable voters, will know how to handle them. 

4. A DAY WITH A LOCAL POLITICIAN x 

A party leader in a large city has numerous duties not imposed 
by law but which he must perform if he is to keep his party 
vote well in hand for the ever coming elections. 

2 a.m. — Aroused from sleep by the ringing of his door bell ; 
went to the door and found a bartender, who asked him to go to 
the police station and bail out a saloonkeeper, who had been 
arrested for violating the Excise law. Furnished bail and 
returned to bed at three o'clock. 

6 a.m. — Awakened by fire engines passing his house. Has- 
tened to the scene of the fire, according to the custom of Tam- 
many district leaders, to give assistance to the fire sufferers, if 
needed. Met several election district captains who are always 
under orders to look out for fires, which are considered great 
vote-getters. Found several tenants who had been burned out, 
took them to a hotel, supplied them with clothes, fed them, and 
arranged temporary quarters for them until they could rent and 
furnish new apartments. 

1 Evening Post, New York, Dec. 14, 1907. 



180 Readings on Parties and Elections 

8.30 a.m. — Went to the police court to look after his con- 
stituents. Found six "drunks." Secured the discharge of four 
by a timely word with the judge, and paid the fines of two. 

9 a.m. — Appeared in the Municipal District Court. Directed 
one of his district captains to act as counsel for a widow against 
whom dispossession proceedings had been instituted and ob- 
tained an extension of time. Paid the rent of a poor family 
about to be dispossessed, and gave them a dollar for food. 

11 a.m. — At home again. Found four men waiting for him. 
One had been discharged by the Metropolitan Railway Company 
for neglect of duty, and wanted the district leader to fix things. 
Another wanted a job on the road. The third sought a place 
on the subway, and the fourth, a plumber, was looking for work 
with the Consolidated Gas Company. The district leader 
spent nearly three hours fixing things for the four men, and suc- 
ceeded in each case. 

3 p.m. — Attended the funeral of an Italian as far as the ferry. 
Hurried back to make his appearance at the funeral of a Hebrew 
constituent. Went conspicuously to the front both in the Catho- 
lic church and the synagogue, and later attended the Hebrew 
confirmation ceremonies in the synagogue. 

7 p.m. — Went to district headquarters and presided over a 
meeting of election-district captains. Each captain submitted 
a list of all the voters in the district, reported on their attitude 
toward Tammany, suggested who might be won over and how 
they could be won, told who were in need, and who were in 
trouble of any kind and the best way to reach them. District 
leader took notes and gave orders. 

8 p.m. — Went to a church fair. Took chances on everything, 
bought ice-cream for the young girls and the children. Kissed 
the little ones, flattered their mothers, and took their fathers out 
for something down at the corner. 

9 p.m. — At the clubhouse again. Spent $10 on tickets for a 
church excursion and promised a subscription for a new church 
bell. Bought tickets for a baseball game to be played by two 



Party Organization 181 

nines from his district. Listened to the complaints of a dozen 
pushcart peddlers who said they were persecuted by the police 
and assured them he would go to Police Headquarters in the 
morning and see about it. 

10.30 p.m. — Attended a Hebrew wedding reception and dance. 
Had previously sent a handsome wedding present to the bride. 

12 p.m. — In bed. 

$. POLITICAL CLUBS X 

Political clubs, especially during the period of the campaign, 
are one of the most effective means of arousing popular interest 
and cultivating party loyalty. There are besides more formal 
organizations which act not only during campaigns. Many 
of these are like other social clubs except for the addition of 
allegiance to a political party as a qualification for member- 
ship. 

The American political clubs last only for the campaign. 
Permanent political clubs are not entirely unknown in the States. 
In New York, in Philadelphia, and in several other important 
centres, there are, of course, large party clubs, but they are rather 
social than political, and, like all American clubs, are more aristo- 
cratic than the English clubs. The absence of a nobility, of an 
upper class created by the law and recognized by the national 
manners, is made up for in certain American cities by coteries, 
which form into magic circles, to which admittance can be gained 
only by showing one's credentials, or what they are pleased to 
consider as such. This tendency to social exclusiveness has not 
spared the select political clubs. But with that they are much 
less homogeneous than the English clubs as regards the political 
views of their members, because social conditions fill too large a 
place in the choice of the members, and especially because the 
latter are getting to change their party more and more frequently, 

1 Ostrogorski, M., Democracy and the Party System. Macmillan, New 
York, 19 10; pp. 166-170. 



1 82 Readings on Parties and Elections 

while remaining members of the club. Lastly social relations in 
the United States, while sometimes painfully narrow, are super- 
ficial, and, amid the kaleidoscopic existence of the Americans, 
lack the stability which would give them the property of a polit- 
ical cement. 

Alongside these political clubs, which are little distinguishable 
from non-political ones, there are others, in several large cities, 
of a much less exalted kind, whose members are almost all poli- 
ticians, and, for the most part, politicians of low degree. Apart 
from the mercenaries of pclitics, the " workers," they are fre- 
quented only by the men who buy their influence, such as con- 
tractors for public works and government purveyors. The most 
distinguished of these clubs, if it is permissible to use the epithet, 
is the Democratic Club of Tammany Hall in New York. The 
subscription to the clubs is purely nominal; the expenses are 
almost always borne by a head politician, a "leader," who makes 
the club the citadel from which he directs the political operations 
necessary for getting hold of an elective post for himself or for 
his favourite candidate. The clubs of the politicians combine 
politics and pleasure, by organizing balls in winter, excursions 
in summer, outings, "chowder parties," or "clam bakes"; but 
even in these cases, the politicians keep to themselves and their 
own set without attracting the bulk of the electorate. 

At the end of the eighties of the last century attempts were 
made to develop the system of permanent clubs and to recruit 
their members on a broader basis. The Republicans formed 
clubs all over the territory, and combined them into a national 
federation, the Republican National League. In reality most 
of the clubs have only a nominal existence, — hardly one club 
in a hundred has premises of its own ; generally they hire a room 
for the occasion, and their meetings are few and far between. 
The members are, to a great extent, ofriceseekers, and young 
men attracted by the titles of president, vice-president, and other 
dignities which the clubs provide for their youthful vanity. The 
Democrats have followed the example set by their rivals, but 



Party Organization 183 

their National Association of clubs collapsed some time ago owing 
to internal divisions. The Republican National League, how- 
ever, is not much more of a living body. 

There are, however, permanent clubs and in very large 
numbers, which, without bearing this name, and without hav- 
ing any ostensible connection with politics, wield very great 
electoral influence. These are the drinking-saloons, especially 
in the large cities. With the lower orders, who spend their 
leisure time in the bars, the saloon-keeper is " guide, philosopher, 
and friend." The party organizations and the candidates there- 
fore find him their most valuable helper for manipulating the 
electorate. 

Of course, the drinking-saloons take in only the dregs of the 
population. To lay hand on the higher strata of the voters, the 
election organizers form for the duration of the campaign "cam- 
paign clubs" of citizens who in ordinary times pay little or no 
heed to politics. The great date of the presidential election re- 
minds them of their civic duty. They respond piously to this 
sacred appeal and enroll themselves in a club flying the colours 
of their party or of its candidate for the Presidency. For the 
two or three months that the campaign will last, they meet, per- 
haps, every evening, they listen to speeches which glorify their 
candidate, they sing political songs, absorb enthusiasm for the 
party ticket, and diffuse this enthusiasm around them, in the 
club and outside it. This action and reaction comes all the easier 
to them since, very often, they do not present fortuitous aggre- 
gations of atoms brought together in a haphazard way, but 
groups formed in accordance with more or less natural affinities, 
due to a common occupation, race, or religion. Thus each Presi- 
dential campaign is the signal for an outburst of clubs, Republi- 
can and Democratic, of commercial travellers, of clerks of dry- 
goods stores, of lawyers, of merchants, of railroad employees ; of 
workmen's clubs formed, not by wards, but by workshops, the 
workmen in a large factory dividing, perhaps, into two clubs, 
the one Republican, the other Democratic; clubs of coloured 



184 Readings on Parties and Elections 

men ; Irish, German, Jewish, Polish, Swedish clubs ; and even 
Republican or Democratic "cyclists' brigades." 

A special kind of campaign clubs are "marching clubs," with 
the particular duty of walking about in procession and making a 
noise in the streets and squares, in honour of the party and its 
candidates. We have already come across clubs of this kind in 
the city where the National Convention was held, and where 
they carried on a gymnastic and vocal propaganda in favour of 
the presidential aspirants. Their usefulness to the parties is of 
a twofold kind: they help greatly to keep up "enthusiasm," 
and they gather to their standard young electors attracted by 
the quasi-military organization of these clubs; their members 
wear a special uniform and hold varied grades, such as captain 
and colonel. 

Of late years the craze for campaign clubs has spread to the 
schools, the colleges. In almost every college or university there 
are formed, for the duration of the campaign, clubs of students 
to help the parties by speaking or by other forms of propaganda. 

The number of electors enrolled in the campaign clubs is un- 
doubtedly very considerable, and can hardly be below 1,500,- 
000 or 2,000,000. If to these volunteer forces are added the 
paid combatants, they will all together, with the regular army 
of the party organizations, make up the enormous total of 
4,000,000 out of an electoral population of 15,000,000 or 18,000,- 
000. That is to say, there is one militant, entering heart and soul 
into the fray, to every four or five electors. 

6. THE CONTRAST OF COUNTRY AND CITY ELECTORATES l 

City and country electorates have become sharply contrasted, 
due to the floating character of city population, and the impossi- 
bility of acquaintance with all the voters. The different work 
to be done necessitates different methods of party organization. 

1 Bryce, J., The American Commonwealth. Macmillan, New York, 1910; 
Vol. II, pp. 101-104. 



Party Organization 185 

To understand how (the electoral machinery) actually works 
one must distinguish between two kinds of constituencies or vot- 
ing areas. One kind is to be found in the great cities — places 
whose population exceeds, speaking roughly, 100,000 souls, of 
which there were in 19 10 over forty in the Union. The other 
kind includes constituencies in smaller cities and rural districts. 
What I have to say will refer chiefly to the Northern States — i.e. 
the former Free States, because the phenomena of the Southern 
States are still exceptional, owing to the vast population of igno- 
rant negroes, among whom the whites, or rather the better sort 
of whites, still stand as an aristocracy. 

The tests by which one may try the results of the system of 
selecting candidates are two. Is the choice of candidates for 
office really free — i.e. does it represent the unbiassed wish and 
mind of the voters generally ? Are the offices filled by men of 
probity and capacity sufficient for the duties? 

In the country generally, i.e. in the rural districts and small 
cities, both these tests are tolerably well satisfied. It is true 
that many of the voters do not attend the primaries. The se- 
lection of delegates and candidates is left to be made by that sec- 
tion of the population which chiefly interests itself in politics ; 
and in this section local attorneys and office-seekers have much 
influence. The persons who seek the post of delegate as well as 
those who seek office, are seldom the most energetic and intelli- 
gent citizens ; but that is because the latter class have something 
better to do. An observer from Europe who looks to see men 
of rank and culture holding the same place in State and local 
government as they do in England, especially rural England, or 
in Italy, or even in parts of rural France and Switzerland, will 
be disappointed. But democracies must be democratic. Equal- 
ity will have its perfect work; and you cannot expect citizens 
pervaded by its spirit to go cap in hand to their richer neighbours 
begging them to act as delegates, or city or county officials, or 
congressmen. This much may be said, that although there is in 
America no difference of rank in the European sense, superior 



1 86 Readings on Parties and Elections 

wealth or intelligence does not prejudice a man's candidature, 
and in most places improves its chance. If such men are not 
commonly chosen it is for the same reason which makes them 
comparatively scarce among the town -councillors of English 
municipalities. 

In these primaries and conventions the business is always pre- 
arranged — that is to say, the local party committee come 
prepared with their list of delegates or candidates. This list is 
usually, but not invariably, accepted ; or, if serious opposition 
appears, alterations may be made to disarm it, and preserve the 
unity of the party. The delegates and candidates chosen are 
generally members of the local committee, their friends or crea- 
tures. Except in very small places, they are rarely the best men. 
But neither are they the worst. In moderate-sized communities 
men's characters are known and the presence of a bad man in 
office brings on his fellow-citizens evils which they are not too 
numerous to feel individually. Hence tolerable nominations 
are made : the general sentiment of the locality is not outraged ; 
and although the nominating machinery is worked rather in 
the name of the people than by the people, the people are willing 
to have it so, knowing that they can interfere if necessary to 
prevent serious harm. 

In large cities the results are different because the circum- 
stances are different. We find there, besides the conditions pre- 
viously enumerated, — viz. numerous offices, frequent elections, 
universal suffrage, an absence of stimulating issues, — three 
others of great moment. 

A vast population of ignorant immigrants. 

The leading men all intensely occupied with business. 

Communities so large that people know little of one another, 
and that the interest of each individual in good government is 
comparatively small. 

Any one can see how these conditions affect the problem. The 
immigrants are entitled to obtain a vote after three or four years' 
residence at most (often less), but they are not fit for the suffrage. 



Party Organization 187 

They know nothing of the institutions of the country, of its 
statesmen, of its political issues. Those especially who come 
from Central and Southern Europe bring little knowledge of 
the methods of free government, and from Ireland they used to 
bring a suspicion of all government. Incompetent to give an 
intelligent vote, but soon finding that their vote has a value, 
they fall into the hands of the party organizations, whose offi- 
cers enroll them in their lists, and undertake to fetch them to 
the polls . . . 

In these great transatlantic cities, population is far less set- 
tled and permanent than in the cities of Europe. In New York, 
Chicago, St. Louis, Minneapolis, San Francisco, a very small 
part of the inhabitants are natives of the city, or have resided in 
it for twenty years. Hence they know but little of one another 
or even of those who would in Europe be called the leading men. 
There are scarcely any old families, families associated with the 
city, whose name recommends one of their scions to the confi- 
dence of his fellow-citizens. There are few persons who have 
had any chance of becoming generally known, except through 
their wealth; and the wealthy have neither time nor taste for 
political work. Political work is a bigger and heavier affair 
than in small communities; hence ordinary citizens cannot at- 
tend to it in addition to their regular business. Moreover, the 
population is so large that an individual citizen feels himself a 
drop in the ocean. His power of affecting public affairs by 
his own intervention seems insignificant. His pecuniary loss 
through over-taxation, or jobbery, or malversation, is trivial in 
comparison with the trouble of trying to prevent such evils. 

As party machinery is in great cities most easily perverted, 
so the temptation to pervert it is there strongest, because the 
prizes are great. The offices are well paid, the patronage is 
large, the opportunities for jobs, commissions on contracts, 
pickings, and even stealings, are enormous. Hence it is well 
worth the while of unscrupulous men to gain control of the ma- 
chinery by which these prizes may be won. 



1 8 8 Readings on Parties and Elections 

7. STATE CENTRAL COMMITTEES 1 

The active management of the party machinery is largely cen- 
tralized in the hands of the State Central Committee. 

The purpose of this sketch is to present a brief outline of 
the organization of the central or executive committees of the 
Republican and Democratic parties in the several states. . . 

Apportionment of membership. On examining the method of 
apportionment of membership on the committees, it appears 
that several different systems are in vogue. The various units 
on which representation is based are the congressional district, 
the county, the legislative district, representative or senatorial, 
the judicial district, and the town. There is also a mixed or 
composite basis. The prevailing practice is to use either the 
congressional district or the county as the unit of representation. 
Of the Republican organizations fifteen use the congressional 
district, and of the Democratic, twelve, making a total of twenty- 
seven. The county is the unit in sixteen Republican committees 
and in twenty of the Democratic, making in all thirty-six. Of 
the ninety organizations, then, sixty- three employ either the con- 
gressional district or the county as the unit of representation. 
The legislative district is the basis in fourteen committees, nine 
Republican and five Democratic. The judicial district is used 
in two cases and the town in a like number. In some cases a 
mixed system is found, combining several methods. Of these 
the most remarkable is that of the Idaho Democratic committee, 
in which one member is taken from each of the five judicial dis- 
tricts, two are taken from each of the twenty-one counties, seven 
are chosen at large, and three so-called "press members" are se- 
lected in addition. . . Which of these various methods shall 
be employed is determined by geographical rather than party 
considerations. . . 

The apportionment of members to these various units is 

1 Merriam, C. E., Political Science Quarterly, 1904; pp. 224-233. 



Party Organization 189 

based on geographical or territorial rather than numerical 
considerations. It is, in the main, not the party strength that 
is represented, but a given area or district. In some instances, 
however, recognition is given to the vote polled, although the 
principle is seldom fully carried out. . . 

The size of the committee varies greatly in the different 
states. The largest is the Maryland Republican committee, 
which contains 124 members. . . Some of the committees, 
on the other hand, are comparatively small. Thus the Demo- 
cratic and Republican committees of Virginia and of Iowa are 
each composed of only eleven members; and in many other 
states the committees are little larger. 

Term of service. — The term of membership on the state com- 
mittees varies from one to four years, but the most common 
period is two years. . . 

Method of election. — The election of members to the com- 
mittee follows a general but not unvarying rule. In most cases 
the delegates to the state convention from the area to be rep- 
resented, whether this be the congressional district, the county 
or some other area, choose their quota of members. For this 
purpose they caucus separately. The choice of the caucus is usu- 
ally final, but in some cases the state convention has the right 
to reject the members selected. In some states, however, the 
members of the central committee are not selected in the state 
convention, but by the local authorities in the counties. . . 

A unique method of choosing the state committee is that pro- 
vided for in the Wisconsin primary law, which is to be submitted 
to popular vote in 1904. Having abolished the state convention, 
the law proposes that, after the primaries, the party nominees 
for state office together with the candidates for the legislature 
shall meet and choose the state committee. In Mississippi, 
where a state-wide direct primary law has been adopted, the 
state convention still assembles every four years, and at that 
time selects the state central committee. 

Vacancies and removals. — Vacancies in the committee are in 



190 Readings on Parties and Elections 

general filled by the remaining members. In a considerable num- 
ber of states, however, there are exceptions to this rule. In states 
where the unit of representation is the county, the power to fill the 
vacancy is not infrequently lodged in the local committee. . . 

The removal of members from the state committee seems not 
to be contemplated at all in some states. There is no provision 
for removal in the state constitution of the party and there is no 
record of any such case. The chairman of the Delaware Re- 
publican organization states, in reply to the question touching 
removal, that " ostracism" is the only method known to him; 
and from Iowa comes the answer : " making it so hot for him that 
he will resign." But in many states there is a well defined un- 
derstanding as to the process by which a recalcitrant or disloyal 
member may be removed from the managing committee. . . 

Officers and sub-committees. — The officers of a state com- 
mittee are few in number. There is a chairman, a secretary, a 
treasurer, and sometimes, in addition to these, a vice-chairman 
and a sergeant-at-arms. These functionaries are generally 
elected by the committee itself ; but they need not be, and fre- 
quently are not, members of the committee. In most of the 
organizations there are sub-committees, of which the most im- 
portant is the executive or campaign committee. This is usually 
composed of from three to nine members and is the most active 
part of the state organization. Another important committee 
is that on finance, and in many state organizations there is a sep- 
arate auditing committee. A speakers' bureau or literary bureau 
or both are frequently found. Of all the officers the chairman 
and the secretary of the whole committee are the most important. 
Indeed the campaign in many cases is really placed in the hands 
of these two men. 

Powers. — The powers of the state central committee are 
seldom clearly defined, either by the written or by the unwritten 
constitution of the party. It can scarcely be said to govern and 
guide the party in the formulation and execution of policies, for 
as a rule this is a matter altogether outside its jurisdiction. The 



Party Organization 191 

informal steering or managing committee which really determines 
the policy of the party is likely to be another group of politicians, 
although the actual leaders of course control the state committee 
through their agents and are sometimes found there in person. 
The important powers and duties of a state committee, as of a 
national committee, center in the conduct of the campaign. 
Given the candidates and the platform, it is the function of the 
state committee to see that these particular persons and prin- 
ciples are endorsed by the voters of the state, or at least that 
the full party strength is polled for them. The state committee 
determines the time and place of the nominating convention, 
fixes the ratio of representation, and issues the call for the con- 
vention. It often makes up the temporary roll of the conven- 
tion, suggests temporary officers of the convention, and in gen- 
eral assists in putting the machinery of the nominating body 
in operation. After the convention is over, the committee takes 
charge of the conduct of the campaign and exercises general 
supervision over its progress. The committee raises the funds 
necessary for the prosecution of the work and distributes them 
at its discretion. It prepares and sends out appropriate litera- 
ture to strategic points within the state, and assigns speakers to 
places where it is supposed they will be most effective. In short, 
the state committee is the managing board entrusted with the 
conduct of the state campaign, and as such is expected to prac- 
tise all the arts known to politicians to bring about the success 
of the party. 

The adoption of the Australian ballot system has involved a 
legal recognition of the political party as sponsor for nominations 
to appear on the ballot under the party emblem or with the party 
name. The convention was declared the official representative 
of the party in the first instance, but it was found necessary to 
make further provision for vacancies caused by the death or dis- 
ability of candidates for state office. The laws of most states 
accordingly authorize the state central committee of the party 
to fill vacancies occurring on the ticket. . . 



192 Readings on Parties and Elections 

In the conduct of a campaign the state committee cooperates 
with the national committee, and to some extent with the con- 
gressional committee. It must also be constantly in touch with 
the local organizations of the state. On the nature of the rela- 
tion between the state and the local authorities, the printed rules 
of the state organizations present many interesting facts. In 
some instances the authority of the central committee over the 
local committees is very great. . . 

In conclusion it may be said that the plans of organization 
here outlined are by no means rigid and inflexible in their nature. 
They are convenient methods of directing campaign work, but 
they may be altered or radically changed by the action of the 
state convention. Thus in Illinois, in 1900, when the nominee 
of the Republican party for governor failed to secure a majority 
of the state central committee, a resolution was introduced in 
the convention increasing the number of the committee by the 
addition of eight members at large. This motion was declared 
carried by the chairman of the convention, who proceeded to 
name eight members in the interest of the gubernatorial candi- 
date. In any party emergency, or in the course of a fierce fac- 
tional fight, the rules governing the organization of the central 
committee are likely to be over-ridden by the stronger or more 
cunning. To infer, however, from such instances of interven- 
tion on the part of state conventions, that the organization of a 
state central committee is a matter of slight importance, and 
that it makes little difference in whose hands the control rests, 
would be quite erroneous. To the ambitious aspirant for party 
authority the state central committee is a point of great strategic 
importance, and many a bitter fight has been waged for its con- 
trol. The possession of the central committee is, if not conclu- 
sive, at least presumptive evidence of party authority and con- 
trol — one of the external marks of sovereignty. 



Party Organization 193 

8. THE PARTY MACHINE IN PENNSYLVANIA 1 

Probably the most perfect example of a state machine 
which has been developed in the United States is the Republican 
organization in Pennsylvania, which is thus described by one of 
its critics. 

Twenty parts of the potent, puzzling and destructive Quay 
machine, constituted of Federal and State officeholders, are as 
follows : — 

Part A — A Republican State Committee which in every 
part is subjugated to serve the personal interests of Senator 
Quay first and the party next, without respect to the will of 
the people. 

Part B — Great Prestige and Patronage, controlled by Quay 
as a United States Senator, with two votes, his own and the 
other. 

Part C — Thirty Congressmen, with their secretaries, sixty 
persons, whose salaries aggregate $180,000 annually, and who 
are responsible to the machine for their respective districts. 

Part D — The 419 officers and employees of the State gov- 
ernment, who receive in salaries $1,034,500 annually, and who 
are selected only because they are supposed to be able to deliver 
the votes of their districts to any one the Quay machine dictates. 
These men are all assessed by the bosses and some of the docu- 
ments in our possession will be curious reading some time. 

Part E — The State Senate, with every officer, from presi- 
dent pro tern, down to page boys, selected to do the machine's 
bidding. The expenses of the Senate last year were $169,604. 

Part F — The State house of representatives, with members, 
officers and employees, 257 in number, who drew $468,302 
last year. All committees are selected by the machine, and are 

1 Wanamaker, John, Speeches of Hon. John Wanamaker on Quayism and 
Boss Domination in Pennsylvania Politics. Published by the Business Men's 
Republican League of the State of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia. Undated 
(1898?); pp. 231-235. 




194 Readings on Parties and Elections 

chairmaned by men who know no will but that of Senator Quay. 
Thus his machine absolutely controls all revenues and tax 
legislation. 

Part G — Eight thousand one hundred and twenty-two post 
offices, with salaries amounting to $3,705,446. Most postmas- 
ters are made the personal agents of the machine in their re- 
spective towns. 

Part H — Four thousand one hundred and forty-nine officers, 
a majority of whom are controlled by Senator Quay's machine, 
whose salaries amount to $5,000,000. 

Part I — The Philadelphia Mint, with 438 employees, who 
receive in yearly salaries $326,565. 

Part J — The offices of collector of port, with 400 employees, 
who receive in salaries $454,000. 

Part K — The internal revenue offices, with 281 employees, 
who receive in salaries $356,400. 

Part L — The United States Circuit and District Courts, 
with forty-one employees, who receive in salaries $95,000. 

Part M — League Island Navy Yard and State arsenals, 
with 585 employees, who receive in salaries $725,000, making 
a total of 14,705 officers and employees who receive from the 
state and national governments $7,608,911 annually. 

This great army of officeholders are thoroughly organized, 
and are at work every day in the year for the preservation of 
the Quay machine. To give you a clearer conception of what 
the machine is, I have taken, for example, a single county — 
that of Dauphin — which is eleventh in population and thir- 
teenth in valuation, of the sixty-seven counties of this state. In 
this Quay stronghold there are seventy-three salaried county 
offices, controlled by the machine, with annual salaries amount- 
ing to $70,500; also seven Presidential post offices, paying sal- 
aries amounting to $12,000, and fifty-one fourth-class offices, 
paying $8,924, making a total of 131 machine agents, who are 
paid $91,424 by the state and national governments, at work in 
one county. 



Party Organization 195 

Part N — The thousand of trustees, other officials and em- 
ployees of hospitals, state and private ; state prisons, reforma- 
tories, state asylums, charitable homes, state colleges, normal 
schools, soldiers' orphan schools, scientific institutes and mu- 
seums, who are expected to support the machine or the appro- 
priations of their institutions will be endangered. 

Part O — The combined capital of the brewers of the state, 
their thousands of employees and dependent patrons whom they 
control. It is alleged to have been the money of the brewers 
that paid the large sums during Superintendent of Mint Boyer's 
administration as state treasurer, necessary to make good short- 
ages, which saved the machine, when his cashier, Mr. Livesey, 
became a fugitive from justice. 

Part P — Besides the amounts paid for salaries of state 
officers which have already been accounted for, the appropriation 
committees, who are of Quay's personal selection, disburse $10,- 
000,000 annually to schools, hospitals, penal institutions, etc. 
The bold manipulation of these funds for the benefit of the ma- 
chine has educated people to regard moneys received for these 
purposes as personal contributions from Senator Quay, in return 
for which they must render help to his machine. 

Part Q — The State Liquor League, whose members are 
in every city, town, hamlet and cross-roads throughout the state, 
and who maintain a permanent state organization, having head- 
quarters and representatives at Harrisburg during the sessions 
of the legislature, are always for Senator Quay's machine, and 
form an important part of the machine's operations. 

Part R — A large number of the common pleas judges 
throughout the state, who use their license-granting power for 
the benefit of the machine, by rewarding those faithful to the 
cause of Quay, and punishing those opposed to the machine. 

Part S — The millions of withheld school and personal tax 
moneys that are used to further the interests of the machine. 
At 3 per cent, interest — the rate that Smedley Darlington tes- 
tified, last week, under oath, his trust company paid — the ma- 



196 Readings on Parties and Elections 

chine has taken $2,500,000 of your money since Senator Quay 
began his reign. 

Part T — The hundreds of subservient newspapers which 
are recipients of machine favors, with their army of news- 
gatherers and correspondents, who are forced to chloroform 
public sentiment and hide the iniquities of the machine. . . 

The principal allies and partners of the machine are the cor- 
porations. The 15,000 national and state officeholders and 
the thousands of other officials connected with state institutions 
form a small part of the whole number of obedient machine men 
who are constantly at the command of Senator Quay, the ad- 
mitted boss of the machine. The corporation employees of the 
state who are controlled for Quay's use increase the number to 
the proportions of a vast army. 

The steam railroads of the state employ 85,117 men and pay 
them annually in wages $49,400,000. Of this number the Penn- 
sylvania and Reading Railroads furnish 37,911 and 16,083 men 
respectively. The Vanderbilt system furnishes 12,432 men, the 
Baltimore & Ohio 3,615, the New Jersey Central 2,864, the Lehigh 
Valley 12,062, and the D. L. & W. 2,150. The great street 
railways of the state, who have received valuable legislative 
concessions for nothing, give the machine a loyal support with 
12,079 employees, who are paid in salaries $6,920,692 every year. 

That monopoly of monopolies, the Standard Oil Company, 
pays annually $2,500,000 to its 3,000 employees, who are taught 
fidelity to Senator Quay's machine. The Bethlehem Iron 
Works, whose armor plates are sold to the government for nearly 
double the contract price offered to foreign countries, influence 
their employees to such an extent that in the city of Bethlehem 
it has been found difficult to get men to stand as anti-Quay 
delegates. 

The thousands of workingmen of the Carnegie Iron Works, 
it is said, are marched to the polls under the supervision of super- 
intendents and foremen, and voted for Quay candidates under 
penalty of losing their jobs. 



Party Organization 197 

The great express companies who furnish franks to machine 
followers, one of which is bossed by Senator Piatt, with their 
thousands of men, can be counted on for great service to the 
machine. 

The telegraph companies, whose state officials can, it is said, 
be found at the inner Quay councils, with the thousands of em- 
ployees distributed at every important point throughout the 
state, and before whom a large share of all important news must 
pass, is one of the most dangerous parts of the Quay machine. 

The interests of the corporations and those of the masses 
have been diverging for many years, until now what is for the 
people's good will not suit the corporations, and what will seem- 
ingly satisfy the corporations is no longer safe to the people. 
The unlimited use of wealth and capital where there is free and 
full competition is not to be feared, but capital licensed by un- 
just and discriminating laws is the threatening evil of the day. 

Capital with its manifold possibilities for good in itself be- 
comes an agency of wrong and calamity when harnessed with 
favored legislation. 

9. RULES OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY IN PENNSYLVANIA * 

In the states the action of parties has been regulated to vary- 
ing degrees by state laws, but parties supplement these by rules 
laid down for their own management. 

At a State Convention held in Harrisburg, August 24, 1899 
the following rules were adopted for the guidance of the Republi- 
can party in Pennsylvania : 

First. — That the Chairman of the Republican State Com- 
mittee shall be elected by the candidates nominated at the State 
Convention and the permanent chairman thereof as soon as 
practicable after the adjournment of the State Convention, and 

1 Adopted in state convention at Harrisburg, August 24, 1899. In force 
1911-1912. (C. LI. J.) 



198 Readings on Parties and Elections 

shall hold his office until his successor is elected. If there should 
be a vacancy caused by death, resignation or otherwise, after 
the meeting of the Republican State Convention and before the 
next ensuing general election, the candidates nominated at the 
said convention and the permanent chairman aforesaid shall 
fill such vacancy, but should a vacancy occur after the next en- 
suing general election, the Republican State Committee shall be 
called together by the secretaries of said committee and the ma- 
jority of the members of the said committee present shall select 
a chairman, who shall serve until his successor is elected. 

Second. — That the State Committee shall be elected by 
the delegates of the State Convention in each Senatorial district 
and shall hold their offices until their successors are elected, each 
of said districts being entitled to not less than two members : 
Provided, however, that where a Senatorial district consists of 
more than one county, each county shall be entitled to one mem- 
ber : And provided further, that the Chairman of the State Com- 
mittee shall have power to appoint twelve members of the State 
Committee-at-large, who shall have the same voice in the man- 
agement of the affairs of the party as the members selected from 
the Senatorial districts. 

Third. — That the time for holding the State Convention 
of the Republican party shall be fixed by the State Committee 
and at least sixty days' notice thereof given of the date for hold- 
ing the said convention. 

Fourth. — That the delegates to the State Convention 
shall be chosen in the manner in which candidates for the Gen- 
eral Assembly are nominated, or in accordance with the party 
rules in force in the respective counties of this Commonwealth. 

Fifth. — That representation in State Conventions shall 
be based on the vote polled at the Presidential election preceding, 
one delegate being allotted to each Legislative district for every 
two thousand Republican votes and an additional delegate for a 
fraction exceeding one thousand votes, each district to have at 
least one delegate. 



Party Organization 199 

Sixth. — That the State Committee shall hereafter have 
power to place in nomination candidates to fill any vacancies 
upon the State ticket caused by death, resignation or otherwise, 
and the said committee shall also have power to place in nomina- 
tion a candidate to fill vacancy caused by death or resignation 
of any officer to be voted for by the electors of the State, where 
such vacancy shall occur after the regular convention of the party 
has been held, and the vacancy is to be filled at the next ensu- 
ing general election. 

Seventh. — In all Congressional, Senatorial or Judicial 
districts, where the delegates or conferees in said Congressional, 
Senatorial or Judicial districts are unable to agree and make a 
nomination 55 days prior to the general election, the Chairman 
of the Republican State Committee shall appoint one representa- 
tive Republican from each county of the district, who shall be- 
come a part of the original body and shall have the same voice in 
the deliberations as the original members. In event the con- 
vention or conference is then unable to agree within five days 
after the representative Republicans from each county in the 
district are appointed, as aforesaid, the Chairman of the Repub- 
lican State Committee shall select a representative Republican 
in the district who shall act as umpire or referee in making 
a nomination. 



10. THE POWERS OF A NATIONAL COMMITTEE 1 

The National Committee is the center of the party organiza- 
tion. Its functions are closely connected with the election of 
President, but it is also charged with general supervision of the 
party interests throughout the whole country. Its power has 
rapidly increased during the last twenty years. 

1 Ogden, Rollo, " New Powers of the National Committee." Atlantic 
Monthly, Vol. 89, 1902 ; p. 76. For a description of the powers of the con- 
gressional committee see Macy, J., Party Organization and Machinery. Cen- 
tury Co., New York, 1904; pp. 87-92. 



200 Readings on Parties and Elections 

One thing we may always be sure of, — a man or a committee 
will accept and wield every particle of power that offers itself. 
" Power cleaves to him who power exerts." It ought not to 
surprise us, then, if we find, on examination, that what was at 
first only a simple and temporary agency of party activity has 
silently taken to itself new powers, and assumed to exert them 
year in and out, instead of merely through a presidential cam- 
paign. That, in a word, is what I think can be shown to be true 
of the role in our political life which the National Committee 
has come to play. In its present prestige and animus, it would 
dictate to the very party which created it. It would control 
conventions. It would prescribe candidacies. It would dis- 
tribute party rewards. It would both consolidate and perpetu- 
ate the power which has fallen to it. In short the clay of the 
National Committee is ready to say to the party potter that 
moulded it, "What doest thou?" 

Like nearly every rise to undesignated power, that of the Na- 
tional Committee has been slow and gradual. Nemo repente. 
Its early function — the only one described in histories of parties 
and manuals of government — was very modest. It would ap- 
pear that even Mr. Bryce knew of it as only a passing instru- 
ment of the party in a presidential campaign. Merely such, 
in fact, it long was. Most people did not even know who was 
the Chairman of the National Committee at any given time. . . 

The change began to be sharply marked in 1884. It was owing 
in part to the personality of the Chairman, Senator Gorman, 
who then came forward, without clamor or controversy, to ex- 
tend in a very notable way the powers and emoluments of the 
office. But his opportunity lay largely in the fact that a great 
party revolution was effected under his management. Had 
Mr. Blaine's campaign been successful, there is no reason to sup- 
pose that his Chairman, Mr. B. F. Jones, would have ranked as 
anything more than simply another of the respectable but mean- 
ingless figureheads of the National Committee. But with Gor- 
man the case was different. Under his guidance, a party came 



Party Organization 20 1 

to power which had been out of office for a quarter of a century. 
It meant something like a convulsion. The Democratic party 
was stirred to its depths, — some would say to its dregs. Masses 
of men were swayed by new hopes of office ; the whole federal 
administration was to be reorganized ; the claims of individuals 
necessarily unknown to the President elect had to be sifted, and 
who so natural a presiding genius in all this work as the man who 
had had his hand upon each of the levers of the Democratic 
machine for five exciting months, and who enjoyed in a peculiar 
way the prestige of an unprecedented victory on a close-fought 
field? At all events, thousands of Democrats turned to Mr. 
Gorman at that juncture, and turned to him, not as Senator 
from Maryland, but as Chairman of the National Committee. 
How he magnified the latter office was not fully known at the 
time, except to those who had occasion to observe matters from 
the inside. Mr. Gorman was never a man to go hunting with a 
brass band. It was quietly, but none the less effectively, that 
he made his power as party Chairman tell in the distribution of 
party patronage, in the shaping of legislation, and as well in 
determining party policy. Not merely at the beginning of Presi- 
dent Cleveland's first term, but all through it, those who were 
intimately acquainted with affairs at Washington knew how 
large a significance and how great a weight came to be associated 
with the influence of Senator Gorman. His vise was most 
eagerly in demand by office-seekers. His voice was most lis- 
tened to in caucus. And the new deference which he won came 
to him, not as Mr. Gorman, not as Senator Gorman, but as Chair- 
man Gorman. His tenure of the position marked the first great 
step in the enlargement of its powers and privileges. 

He was closely followed by a man in the opposite party, who 
carried the assumptions of the National Chairman to a still higher 
pitch. Mr. Quay was less secret in his methods than Mr. Gor- 
man. Immediately after the Presidential election of 1888, he 
publicly announced that his party office he was bound to make a 
continuous one ; that he was going to look carefully to the work 



202 Readings on Parties and Elections 

of garnering all the fruits of victory ; and that the National Com- 
mittee (meaning himself) was not to sink back into inactivity, 
but was to keep a firm hand upon the party organization and 
upon party strategy. How persistently Senator Quay adhered to 
this plan is matter of too recent history to require detailing 
here. Enough to say that he sensibly enlarged the preroga- 
tives and stiffened the self-assertion of the office he held. . . 

It (was) in the person of Senator Hanna that this growth 
reached its culmination. . . 

Never, it is safe to say, did a party Chairman previously have 
so much to do with the apportionment of party patronage. The 
President gave him substantially a free hand in the South. Then 
there came along the Spanish War, yielding our Caesar of a 
Chairman further meat on which to grow great. Thousands of 
new appointments had to be made. For each applicant the 
indorsement of Chairman Hanna was eagerly sought. His 
power grew by power. After four years of its gradual increase 
came another successful campaign for the presidency, under his 
management. Reckoning all this in, we begin to see how high 
were the pretensions, how proud the importance and influence, 
which this most able and assertive of all the Chairmen of 
National Committees might have been excused for thinking 
lawfully his own. . . 

It is difficult to set off, each by itself, the elements of the polit- 
ical power of the party National Committee, vested largely in 
its Chairman, for the reason that they are all inextricably in- 
terdependent. The Chairman has the spending of vast sums of 
money : this gives him political power. But he has the money 
to spend only because he is first in a position of political power. 
So of his rights of patronage ; of control of party conventions, 
big and little ; of his dictation in both party maneuvering and 
public legislation : all these things dovetail into one and another, 
and appear now as cause, now as consequence. Still, it is pos- 
sible to see just how each of the instruments in the hand of the 
National Chairman may be made subservient to the upbuilding 



Party Organization 203 

of his own prestige and power. He has, for example, millions of 
dollars to disburse. There is good authority for the assertion 
that the Republican campaign fund of 1896 was upwards of seven 
million dollars. Mr. Hanna argued in 1900 that it ought to be 
twice as great, — presumably because the country was twice as 
prosperous. At all events, he was not cramped for funds in 
either year. Now the outlay of such huge sums necessarily 
means an increment of power for the man who controls it. Such 
will be the case even if he is the most unselfish and incorruptible 
of mortals. Money is power in politics as everywhere else. A 
Chairman who may determine how much is to be allotted to this 
state, that congressional district, this city and the other county, 
becomes inevitably the master of many political legions. There 
is no need of a hard-and-fast understanding between giver 
and recipient, — least of all, of any corrupt bargain. Common 
gratitude and the expectation of similar favors to come are 
enough to bind fast the nominee for Congress, the candidate for 
a Senatorship, or the member of the National Committee for 
any given state, a large part of whose campaign expenses has 
been kindly paid for him from headquarters. It is hard really to 
think ill of a man who has sent you a large check. To oppose 
your humble opinion to his necessarily large and enlightened view 
of party policy and public advantage is sheer presumption. To 
vote for him, or with him, or as he bids you, is thereafter obvi- 
ously the line of least resistance. Thus it is that the bread which 
the National Chairman casts upon the waters returns to him 
after not so many days. 

The pecuniary aspect of the Chairman's power has another 
feature. He collects as well as pays out ; and with many of the 
collections goes an express or tacit party obligation which he 
alone is fully cognizant of, and which it is his peculiar duty to 
see carried out. Rich men do not always contribute to party in 
obedience to the Scriptural injunction to give, asking not again. 
They make conditions, either openly or by hint or gesture. . ., . 

It is not necessary to go into this. The present point simply 



204 Readings on Parties and Elections 

is that all this side of the business is so much more water for the 
mill of the party Chairman. He sits at the receipt of customs. 
To him are confided all the wishes and the schemings, and he 
makes all the promises, that go with the money paid him. Hence 
it becomes his concern to see that there is honor among politi- 
cians. And nothing is more inevitable than the resultant height- 
ening of his political power, repository as he is of secret liens 
upon party action, and the one mysterious agent by means of 
whom they are made good. 

A word or two will suffice to bring out the almost complete 
mastery of party machinery which has fallen into the hands of 
the National Committee since it became a continuous and con- 
tinuously active body, and took to itself such new and great 
powers. When the Chairman now calls to order a national Con- 
vention, he is really facing a large number, sometimes a majority, 
of delegates who are there because he willed them to be there. 
To "call" the Convention has, in fact, come to be pretty nearly 
the same thing as deciding who shall be among the "called." 
The product which the party machine turns out depends too 
much upon the man who gives the signal to set it in motion, and 
who himself gets up steam and oils the bearings, not to have a 
strangely suspicious way of proving to be of just the kind he 
wanted. . . 

The part that control of the patronage always plays in the 
building up of the party Chairman's overweening political power 
has been sufficiently intimated. . . 

What has not been so patent, however, is the fact that even a 
defeated Chairman has a large measure of similar power. . . 

(He) too, has a vast and intricate party machine, upon the 
very pulse of which he keeps his hands. He is in touch with his 
state committeemen. He has his congressional legions at com- 
mand, to make trouble for the party in power unless they and 
he are duly placated with consideration and offices. . . 

They were given him in recognition of his power, and at the 
same time, of course, increased that power. It is of the kind 



Party Organization 205 

which cannot be stripped from a party Chairman even in defeat, 
and which, in continued success, continually increases, until its 
possessor comes naturally to be regarded as almost a coordi- 
nate branch of the general government. . . 

The present writer has no thought of falling into what George 
Eliot called the one form of gratuitous mistake, — prophecy. 
All that he wishes to do is to give a hint of the way in which a 
new power has grown to portentous size in our politics ; to show 
how the Chairman of the National Committee has, little by little, 
taken to himself functions and privileges undreamed of a gen- 
eration ago. . . 

II. THE PRESIDENT AS A PARTY LEADER 1 

In spite of the intent of the framers of the Constitution the 
President has become a great party chief. He can make him- 
self the general of all the party forces throughout the land — in- 
deed a President who failed to do so, would now be a decided 
exception. His is the only voice which can speak the policy of 
the party to the nation as a whole. 

The makers of the Constitution seem to have thought of the 
President as what the stricter Whig theorists wished the king 
to be : only the legal executive, the presiding and guiding author- 
ity in the application of law and the execution of policy. His 
veto upon legislation was only his check" on Congress, — was 
a power of restraint, not of guidance. He was empowered to 
prevent bad laws, but he was not to be given an opportunity to 
make good ones. As a matter of fact he has become very much 
more. He has become the leader of his party and the guide of 
the nation in political purposes, and therefore in legal action. 
The constitutional structure of the government has hampered 
and limited his action in these significant roles, but it has not 
prevented it. . . 

1 Wilson, W., Constitutional Government in the United States. Columbia 
University Press, New York, 1908; Chap. Ill (excerpts). 



2o6 Readings on Parties and Elections 

The role of party leader is forced upon the President by the 
method of his selection. The theory of the makers of the Con- 
stitution may have been that the presidential electors would exer- 
cise a real choice, but it is hard to understand how, as experi- 
enced politicians, they can have expected anything of the kind. 
They did not provide that the electors should meet as one body 
for consultation and make deliberate choice of a President and 
Vice-President, but that they should meet "in their respective 
states" and cast their ballots in separate groups, without the 
possibility of consulting and without the least likelihood of agree- 
ing, unless some such means as have actually been used were em- 
ployed to suggest and determine their choice beforehand. It 
was the practice at first to make party nominations for the presi- 
dency by congressional caucus. Since the Democratic upheaval 
of General Jackson's time nominating conventions have taken 
the place of congressional caucuses ; and the choice of Presidents 
by party conventions has had some very interesting results. 

We are apt to think of the choice of nominating conventions 
as somewhat haphazard. We know, or think that we know, 
how their action is sometimes determined, and the knowledge 
makes us very uneasy. We know that there is no debate in 
nominating conventions, no discussion of the merits of the re- 
spective candidates, at which the country can sit as audience 
and assess the wisdom of the final choice. If there is any talking 
to be done, aside from the formal addresses of the temporary and 
permanent chairman and of those who present the platform and 
the names of the several aspirants for nomination, the assembly 
adjourns. The talking that is to decide the result must be done 
in private committee rooms and behind the closed doors of the 
headquarters of the several state delegations to the conven- 
tion. . . 

In reality there is much more method, much more definite pur- 
pose, much more deliberate choice in the extraordinary process 
than there seems to be. The leading spirits of the national com- 
mittee of each party could give an account of the matter which 



Party Organization 207 

would put a very different face on it and make the methods of 
nominating conventions seem, for all the undoubted elements of 
chance there are in them, on the whole very manageable. More- 
over, the party that expects to win may be counted on to make a 
much more conservative and thoughtful selection of a candidate 
than the party that merely hopes to win. The haphazard se- 
lections which seem to discredit the system are generally made 
by conventions of the party unaccustomed to success. Success 
brings sober calculation and a sense of responsibility. . . 

If the matter be looked at a little more closely, it will be seen 
that the office of President, as we have used and developed it, 
really does not demand actual experience in affairs so much as 
particular qualities of mind and character which we are at least 
as likely to find outside the ranks of our public men as within 
them. What is it that a nominating convention wants in the 
man it is to present to the country for its suffrage ? A man who 
will be and who will seem to the country in some sort an embodi- 
ment of the character and purpose it wishes its government to 
have, — a man who understands his own day and the needs of 
the country, and who has the personality and the initiative to 
enforce his views both upon the people and upon Congress. It 
may seem an odd way to get such a man. It is even possible 
that nominating conventions and those who guide them do not 
realize entirely what it is that they do. But in simple fact the 
convention picks out a party leader from the body of the nation. 
Not that it expects its nominee to direct the interior government 
of the party and to supplant its already accredited and experi- 
enced spokesmen in Congress and in its state and national com- 
mittees ; but it does of necessity expect him to represent it be- 
fore public opinion and to stand before the country as its repre- 
sentative man, as a true type of what the country may expect of 
the party itself in purpose and principle. It cannot but be led 
by him in the campaign ; if he be elected, it cannot but acquiesce 
in his leadership of the government itself. What the country 
will demand of the candidate will be, not that he be an astute 



208 Readings on Parties and Elections 

politician, skilled and practised in affairs, but that he be a man 
such as it can trust, in character, in intention, in knowledge of 
its needs, in perception of the best means by which those needs 
may be met, in capacity to prevail by reason of his own weight 
and integrity. Sometimes the country believes in a party, but 
more often it believes in a man; and conventions have often 
shown the instinct to perceive which it is that the country needs 
in a particular presidential year, a mere representative partisan, 
a military hero, or some one who will genuinely speak for the 
country itself, whatever be his training and antecedents. It is 
in this sense that the President has the role of party leader thrust 
upon him by the very method by which he is chosen. 

As legal executive, his constitutional aspect, the President 
cannot be thought of alone. , He cannot execute laws. Their 
actual daily execution must be taken care of by the several ex- 
ecutive departments and by the now innumerable body of federal 
officials throughout the country. In respect of the strictly exec- 
utive duties of his office the President may be said to administer 
the presidency in conjunction with the members of his cabinet, 
like the chairman of a commission. He is even of necessity 
much less active in the actual carrying out of the laws than are 
his colleagues and advisers. It is therefore becoming more and 
more true, as the business of the government becomes more and 
more complex and extended, that the President is becoming 
more and more a political and less and less an executive officer. 
His executive powers are in commission, while his political pow- 
ers more and more centre and accumulate upon him and are 
in their very nature personal and inalienable. . . 

It is through no fault or neglect of his that the duties appar- 
ently assigned to him by the Constitution have come to be his 
less conspicuous, less important duties, and that duties appar- 
ently not assigned to him at all chiefly occupy his time and 
energy. The one set of duties it has proved practically impos- 
sible for him to perform ; the other it has proved impossible for 
him to escape. 



Party Organization 209 

He cannot escape being the leader of his party except by in- 
capacity and lack of personal force, because he is at once the 
choice of the party and of the nation. He is the party nominee, 
and the only party nominee for whom the whole nation votes. 
Members of the House and Senate are representatives of locali- 
ties, are voted for only by sections of voters, or by local bodies 
of electors like the members of the state legislatures. There is 
no national party choice except that of President. No one else 
represents the people as a whole, exercising a national choice; 
and inasmuch as his strictly executive duties are in fact subor- 
dinated, so far at any rate as all detail is concerned, the Presi- 
dent represents not so much the party's governing efficiency 
as its controlling ideals and principles. He is not so much part 
of its organization as its vital link of connection with the think- 
ing nation. He can dominate his party by being spokesman for 
the real sentiment and purpose of the country, by giving direc- 
tion to opinion, by giving the country at once the information 
and the statements of policy which will enable it to form its 
judgments alike of parties and of men. 

For he is also the political leader of the nation, or has it in his 
choice to be. The nation as a whole has chosen him, and is con- 
scious that it has no other political spokesman. His is the only 
national voice in affairs. Let him once win the admiration and 
confidence of the country, and no other single force can with- 
stand him, no combination of forces will easily overpower him. 
His position takes the imagination of the country. He is the 
representative of no constituency, but of the whole people. 
When he speaks in his true character, he speaks for no special 
interest. If he rightly interpret the national thought and boldly 
insist upon it, he is irresistible ; and the country never feels the 
zest of action so much as when its President is of such insight 
and calibre. Its instinct is for unified action, and it craves a 
single leader. It is for this reason that it will often prefer to 
choose a man rather than a party. A President whom it trusts 
can not only lead it, but form it to his own views. It is the ex- 



210 Readings on Parties and Elections 

traordinary isolation imposed upon the President by our system 
that makes the character and opportunity of his office so ex- 
traordinary. In him are centered both opinion and party. He 
may stand, if he will, a little outside party and insist as it were 
upon the general opinion. It is with the instinctive feeling that 
it is upon occasion such a man that the country wants that 
nominating conventions will often nominate men who are not 
their acknowledged leaders, but only such jnen as the country 
would like to see lead both its parties. The President may also, 
if he will, stand within the party counsels and use the advantages 
of his power and personal force to control its actual programs. 
He may be both the leader of his party and the leader of the na- 
tion, or he may be one or the other. If he lead the nation, his 
party can hardly resist him. His office is anything he has the 
sagacity and force to make it. . . 

The political powers of the President are not quite so obvious 
in their scope and character when we consider his relations with 
Congress as when we consider his relations to his party and to 
the nation. They need, therefore, a somewhat more critical 
examination. . . 

Some of our Presidents have felt the need, which unques- 
tionably exists in our system, for some spokesman of the nation 
as a whole, in matters of legislation no less than in other matters, 
and have tried to supply Congress with the leadership of sug- 
gestion, backed by argument and by iteration and by every legi- 
timate appeal to public opinion. Cabinet officers are shut out 
from Congress ; the President himself has, by custom, no access 
to its floors ; many long-established barriers of precedent, though 
not of law, hinder him from exercising any direct influence upon 
its deliberations ; and yet he is undoubtedly the only spokesman 
of the whole people. They have again and again, as often as 
they were afforded the opportunity, manifested their satisfaction 
when he has boldly accepted the role of leader, to which the pecu- 
liar origin and character of his authority entitle him. The Con- 
stitution bids him speak, and times of stress and change must 



Party Organization 211 

more and more thrust upon him the attitude of originator of 
policies. 

His is the vital place of action in the system, whether he ac- 
cept it as such or not, and the office is the measure of the man, 
— of his wisdom as well as of his force. 



VIII. The Ballot 

I. THE AUSTRALIAN BALLOT l 

The Australian ballot has become a recognized part of Ameri- 
can party machinery, but its use in England and in America is 
a recent development. 

We mistakenly assume that the ballot was always a concomi- 
tant of the suffrage, but we should not overlook the facts that 
the provision for vote by ballot was stricken out of Lord Grey's 
Reform Bill in 1832, and that for the ensuing forty years the 
elections in England were conducted under the old viva voce 
system, as they had been for generations preceding. The agita- 
tion for a written ballot was especially active in the late '30's 
of the last century. It was vigorously promoted by the his- 
torians Grote and Macaulay. The opposition resorted to argu- 
ments that we can only half comprehend. There seems to have 
been abroad in the land a vague fear lest the voter, when privi- 
ledged to exercise his franchise in secret, would wreak some awful 
vengeance on those in authority. Nor was this dread confined 
to old England. Sydney Smith, writing in 1839, quotes our own 
John Randolph of Roanoke as remarking in characteristic tone : 
"I scarcely believe we have such a fool in all Virginia as to men- 
tion even the vote by ballot, and I do not hesitate to say that 
the adoption of the ballot would make any nation a nation of 
scoundrels, if it did not find them so." The Southern States of 
the Union kept the viva voce vote long after the ballot had been 

1 Shaw, W. B., "Good Ballot Laws and Bad." Outlook, Dec. 9, 1905; 
pp. 864-867. 



The Ballot 213 

adopted in the North, and in the case of Kentucky the ancient 
method prevailed down to our own day. 

The English opponents of the ballot argued down to the very 
last that secret voting would promote hypocrisy. At the same 
time they sturdily contended — and with good grounds — that 
the American ballot was not really secret at all. With tickets 
printed and circulated by the candidates or party managers, 
with absolutely no privacy for the voter in preparing his ballot, 
it was only in exceptional cases that any citizen's vote was his 
personal secret. There was nothing in either the laws or the 
customs of the country to enforce secrecy, and, as a matter of 
fact, public opinion did not demand such enforcement. Eng- 
land profited sooner than we from this experience. It was shown 
that bribery flourished where the briber was permitted to see that 
the bribed voter "delivered the goods." Therefore, when the 
Ballot Act of 1872 was drafted, British statesmen saw to it that 
American mistakes were not copied. They wisely adopted the 
essential features of the system that had been in successful opera- 
tion in the Australian colonies for nearly a score of years. A 
booth was provided in which the voter, absolutely alone, must 
prepare and fold his ballot, which was printed by the Govern- 
ment instead of at private expense, and which could be obtained 
only from the duly appointed election officials. Safeguards 
were thrown around the voter's privacy at the polls. A heavy 
blow was struck at bribery when votes could no longer be de- 
livered openly to the buyers. It was admittedly unprofitable 
to deal in a commodity whose whole value rested on the word of 
an interested party, and which by no manipulation of the election 
machinery could be "checked up." 

The Australian ballot had been in use, ... for almost twenty 
years before England made it a part of her own electoral ma- 
chinery, and it was almost another twenty years before the 
United States was ready to take this leaf out of Great Britain's 
experience. The adoption of the principles of secrecy and an 
official ballot by so many States in the years 1889-93 meant a 



214 Readings on* Parties and Elections 

great gain for the cause of pure elections in this country. At- 
tempted perversions of the means and thwartings of the ends of 
true reform which have crept into many of the ballot laws should 
not blind us to the fact that these two principles have become 
imbedded in our legislation. Whatever arrangement of names 
upon the ballot may be prescribed by this Legislature or that, 
we may rest assured that public sentiment will not in this day 
permit a return to unofficial voting-papers or the abandonment 
of those legal provisions which now secure the voter's privacy. 

It may safely be assumed that every State will retain these 
essentials of an adequate ballot law, but in other features there 
are now and probably will continue to be wide divergences. . . 

/ 2. FORMS OF BALLOT 1 

The forms which the Australian Ballot has taken in America 
are almost as numerous as the states which have adopted it. 
Some of the more striking contrasts will serve to illustrate how 
the principle has been adapted to the needs of the different com- 
monwealths. 

It is the purpose of this paper to show not only that the form 
of the ballot has a very powerful influence on the results of elec- 
tions, both as regards the freedom of the voter in making his 
choice and the accuracy with which he records it, but also to 
bring out, so far as possible, the precise effects produced by each 
variety of form. . . 

To-day, after seventeen years of experience, the diversity of 
legislation in this country is certainly as great as when the secret 
ballot was a novelty. 

Take the mere matter of size and shape. The voter in Wis- 
consin unfolds in the booth a hugh blanket sheet which in 1904 
measured thirty-five inches by twenty-four. In Florida in the 
same year he made his marks on a narrow strip three and one- 

1 Allen, Philip L., " Ballot Laws and their Workings," Political Science 
Quarterly t Vol. XXI, No. 1, 1906. 



The Ballot 215 

half inches wide and thirty-one and one-half inches long. From 
these the styles run all the way down to the sheet of hardly more 
than note-paper size used in Maine (10 X 8) and Oregon (8 X 12). 
A number of the states undertake to help out the illiterate voter 
by a picture gallery of party emblems, but even in this no party 
adheres everywhere to one design. The Socialists come nearest 
to uniformity, two clasped hands in front of a globe being their 
emblem in Alabama, Delaware, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, 
Louisiana, and New Hampshire, though a torch heads their 
column in Michigan, Ohio, New York, and Utah. The Prohibi- 
tionists are at the other extreme. The only emblem on which 
any two of their state organizations agree is the sun rising over 
a body of water. This emblem is used in Indiana and Kansas. 
They have hatchets in Alabama, a house and yard in Delaware, 
a phoenix in Kentucky, an armorial device in Michigan, an anchor 
in New Hampshire, a fountain in New York and a rose in Ohio. 
The Populists show nearly as much variety, using a combination 
of plough, pick and saw in Alabama, an anvil in Delaware, a 
liberty bell in New York, a plough in Indiana and Kentucky, a 
frame cottage and a tree in Kansas, a factory marked "pro- 
ducers unite" in New Hampshire, and a flag-covered box labelled 
"Jefferson, Jackson and Lincoln" in Michigan. An eagle is the 
commonest device of the Republican party and a gamecock of 
the Democratic ; but the former party is represented by a statue 
of Vulcan in Alabama, a log cabin in Kentucky, an elephant in 
Louisiana, and a portrait of Lincoln with the flag as background 
in Michigan, while the Democrats have a plough in Delaware, 
a flag in Michigan, and a star in New Hampshire and New 
York. . . 

These superficial dissimilarities, however, merely reflect the 
diversity that exists in regard to fundamentals. The especial 
point to be considered first is the relative ease with which under 
different ballot laws a split ticket and a straight ticket may be 
voted. So far as this matter is concerned, the mere shape or 
mechanical arrangement of the ballot is by no means decisive. 



2i 6 Readings on Parties and Elections 

As will appear later, two states may have official ballots practi- 
cally identical, so far as the printer's work is concerned, and yet, 
by reason of the statutes prescribing the method of marking, one 
of these may offer the greatest encouragement to the independent 
voter while the other puts the heaviest penalty on all but the 
straight party man. 

For the purposes of classifying such enactments we will take 
in each state the hypothetical case of two voters: A, who de- 
sires to vote the straight Republican ticket, and B, whose choice 
falls on a Democrat for governor and Republicans for all other 
offices. At our imaginary election there are to be chosen ten 
presidential electors and ten state and local officers. In many of 
the states B, the independent voter, has the choice of several 
methods of recording his preferences. Where such choice exists, 
it is here presumed that he will choose the method involving the 
least mechanical difficulty or labor. Generally speaking, the in- 
dependent voter is the intelligent voter, and after informing him- 
self of the provisions of the ballot law in his state, he will save 
himself unnecessary trouble by taking the shortest cut. 

The commonest ballot is the party-column type, modifications 
of which were used in twenty-three of the forty-five states at 
the last national election. These all agree in having the full 
ticket of each party printed in a single column, usually so ar- 
ranged that all candidates for a given office have their names in 
the same horizontal line. In voting such a ballot five different 
methods are in vogue. 

i. A makes a separate mark opposite each of the twenty 
names in the Republican column. B makes nineteen in that 
column and one opposite the democratic nominee for governor. 
This is the rule in Montana. 

2. A makes a single mark at the head of the Republican 
column. B does the same, and makes an additional mark op- 
posite the name of the Democrat for governor. This is the rule 
in California, New York, North Dakota, Washington, South 
Dakota, Illinois, Ohio, Wisconsin, and Kentucky. 



The Ballot 217 

3. A makes a single mark at the head of the Republican 
column. B does the same, then draws a line through the name 
of the Republican candidate for governor, and makes a mark op- 
posite the Democrat. This is the rule in Michigan, New Hamp- 
shire, Utah, Wyoming, Idaho and Alabama. 

4. A makes a single mark at the head of the Republican col- 
umn. B makes twenty marks, one opposite the Democrat for 
governor and nineteen opposite the names of all other officers in 
the Republican column. This is the rule in Iowa, Louisiana, 
Kansas, Vermont and Indiana. 

5. A designates the Republican column (either by a cross or 
by drawing a line down the others). B does the same, and then 
inserts the Democratic gubernatorial candidate's name in that 
column, either by paster or by writing it in, although that name 
is already printed on the ballot in an adjacent column. This is 
the rule in Delaware, Maine and West Virginia. 

6. The next form of ballot is virtually the foregoing one cut 
into strips. The voter receives a bundle of official ballots, one 
slip for each party. A deposits the Republican slip without al- 
teration. B pastes or writes in the name of the Democrat for 
governor. This is the rule in Connecticut, Missouri, New Jersey 
and Texas. 

7. Georgia, North Carolina and South Carolina are the three 
states which have no official ballots. The candidates or party 
organizations usually prepare and distribute the ballots, which 
may be written or printed or partly written and partly printed. 
A and B can prepare the kinds they want in any way they please, 
conforming merely to certain regulations regarding size and 
quality of paper. 

The fourteen remaining states arrange the names on the bal- 
lot by offices instead of by parties. There are six varieties to 
be noted. 

8. The names of candidates for each office are placed within 
a separate "box" or printed margin, arranged in alphabetical 
order, and each followed by the name of the party making the 



2i 8 Readings on Parties and Elections 

nomination A and B must both pick out and mark their candi- 
dates one by one. (They will make eleven marks apiece if there 
is provision for voting all ten electors at once, and twenty marks 
apiece if there is not.) This is the rule in Massachusetts, Rhode 
Island, Oregon, Nevada and all but eleven counties of Maryland. 

9. The names within the " boxes" are not arranged alpha- 
betically but in the same order of parties for each office. The 
party name is printed after each name. Thus A finds the Repub- 
lican candidates invariably first on the list (or second, as the 
case may be), and B can follow the same uniform rule except as 
regards the governorship. This is the rule in Minnesota. 

10. The names are not in alphabetical order, and those for 
each office are merely printed in a close group without the ruled 
line to separate them. Instead of marking opposite the desired 
name, the voter strikes out all except that one. A and B thus 
make the same number of erasures. This is the rule in Arkansas 
and Virginia. 

11. The names are grouped by offices, but the party of each 
is not designated. This is the rule in Florida, Mississippi, Ten- 
nessee and eleven counties of Maryland. 

12. There is a "box" for each office, the names are arranged 
in alphabetical order with party designation, but across the top 

is printed "I hereby vote a straight ■ — ticket, except 

where I have marked opposite the name of some other candi- 
date." A simply writes the word "Republican" in the blank. 
B does the same, afterwards making a mark opposite the name 
of the Democrat nominated for governor. This is the rule in 
Colorado. 

13. There is a "box" for each office with party designation, 
but somewhere on the ballot a space is provided for voting a 
straight ticket of each party. The electors are so arranged that 
all can be voted by one mark. A makes one mark in the straight 
ticket space. B makes eleven marks, picking out his candidates 
from each party group. This is the rule in Nebraska and 
Pennsylvania. 



The Ballot 219 

Thus at one extreme are the states in which the independent 
voter in the hypothetical case is put to twenty times as much 
mechanical labor in voting as the hide-bound partisan, and at 
the other extreme, those in which the two are put to exactly the 
same amount of trouble in voting. Iowa and Montana have bal- 
lots which look as much alike as the pages of two conservative 
newspapers, yet thjy are at opposite poles as regards the pre- 
mium they put on straight ticket voting. 

The Colorado ballot, but for a single printed line, would be 
extremely like that of Massachusetts, yet, it really stands on an 
exact parity with New York's or Ohio's as regards the ease of 
split ticket voting. Pennsylvania's ballot does not look like 
that of Kansas, yet, on analysis they are seen to differ essentially 
only in the provision which lets the Pennsylvanian vote for all 
the state's presidential electors at once, by a single X mark. . . 

A person of any intelligence, who knows how to read and has 
taken the trouble to find out the names of the candidates, ought 
seemingly to have no difficulty in casting his vote correctly even 
with the most confusing of these forms. (But the returns of 
elections show), if nothing else, the proclivity of the American 
voter to make mistakes where there is any possible excuse for 
his doing so. It is this which makes it impossible to say of any 
type of ballot, "This is the best, and every community should 
adopt it." We know that the straight ticket circle discourages 
independent voting, which is the same thing as saying that it im- 
proves the bad candidate's chances of being a pulled through" 
by the popularity of the good candidate of his party. But in 
letting the illiterate man vote, we assume that he is competent to 
decide at least which party he wants to put in power. The party 
circle with the picture over it may conceivably in some communi- 
ties be the only system under which he can vote without blun- 
ders. A state which contains many such illiterates and is de- 
termined to let them vote must therefore decide, before fixing on 
any form of ballot, whether in view of its peculiar conditions 
haphazard voting or hide-bound voting is the lesser evil. . . 



220 Readings on Parties and Elections 

If it is twenty times as much trouble to vote a split as a straight 
ticket, few persons are going to choose the former, whether the 
unit is a pencil mark or the movement of a celluloid button. 
The fear of making a mistake that will invalidate entirely is, 
it is true, removed, and this should give the voter a greater 
sense of freedom, but the argument of least resistance applies 
nevertheless. . . . 

This is a period in which the importance of little things is 
being more and more recognized. Advertising experts have 
learned to estimate the psychological value of various typo- 
graphical arrangements. Railroad companies have conducted 
expensive tests to determine what style of type in their time- 
tables will be read with the minimum of mistakes and thus save 
their patrons from missing trains through misreading the start- 
ing time. At least as careful attention should be given to the 
make-up of that most potent of all sheets of paper, the ballot. 

3. THE ADVANTAGES OF THE MASSACHUSETTS BALLOT 1 

The Massachusetts ballot has received more general com- 
mendation than any other form. In it the voter must indicate 
not merely his general party preference but his choice of the 
candidates for each office upon which his vote is to count. 

I do not for a moment claim that the Massachusetts system of 
balloting is going to cure all our political evils, but I do claim 
this, that of all the systems of balloting that I know anything 
about it gives to the people the freest opportunity to express 
their wishes. . . 

Massachusetts is neither as largely native born in its popula- 
tion nor does it stand as high educationally as people usually 
suppose. Only 44 out of 100 of our citizens are native born of 
native parents, and on the point of literacy we stand only twenty- 

1 Dana, Richard Henry, " The Form of Ballot. " City Club Bulletin, City 
Club of Philadelphia, April 21, 19 10. 



The Ballot 221 

third in the states of the country. I say this in advance because 
you may think, and sometimes it has been claimed, that the 
Massachusetts form of ballot is successful only where the native 
born prevail and where the people generally are extremely well 
educated. . . 

Under the Massachusetts system, as you doubtless know, the 
candidates for the same office are grouped together alphabeti- 
cally on the ballot with the party name or names after each candi- 
date, and a citizen votes for an official in a group, or officials in 
case more than one are to be voted for in such a group, by placing 
a cross mark opposite the name and party designation of the 
candidate or candidates he chooses. For example, all the candi- 
dates for Governor are in one group, all those for Lieutenant 
Governor are in another group, and so on. . . 

Specimen ballots, of course, are printed on colored paper and 
posted in public places in the streets and also in the polling rooms 
so that voters may examine them before receiving an official 
ballot. 

Now, the chief objections urged against the Massachusetts 
system are, that it takes too long to mark the ballot; that it 
must cause delay in large precincts especially ; that the less edu- 
cated must be discouraged and stay away from the polls or, if 
they come, must make mistakes ; that the system must favor in- 
dependence to the extent of breaking up the parties ; that there 
is a general falling off from the head of the ticket because, as it 
is sometimes urged, the voters get tired and stop marking ; that 
persons standing first in groups, with names nearer the head of 
the alphabet, have an advantage over those coming lower down 
in a group; and that generally speaking the system is not 
popular. . . 

Of all these points it happens that we have a good deal of 
accurate information. The average city precinct has from 400 to 
700 or 800 registered male voters, a few have over 1000, and 
some of those are in manufacturing districts where most of the 
voters have to vote early in the morning or at the noon hour. 



222 Readings on Parties and Elections 

There are eleven polling places in the state in which there are 
from 2000 to 3000 registered voters in each, and yet there has 
been no difficulty in their voting without delay or inconvenience. 
The actual time in marking a single ballot is well under two min- 
utes, while many people mark their ballots, in less than one 
minute. . . 

As to the claim that people are kept away from the polls, 
exactly the opposite is the case. In the first four years it was 
found that more people by twenty per cent, voted for Governor 
than in the last four years under the old system, and there was 
an increase in population of only n per cent. . . 

As to the less educated, especially, being kept away from the 
polls, the cities are supposed to contain a larger proportion of 
less educated voters than the towns, and yet in the three years 
beginning with 1889 when the Massachusetts Act went into 
effect, the percentage of registered voters voting in the twenty- 
five cities was greater than the percentage voting in all the 
towns. . . 

While the system undoubtedly favors independent voting it 
has by no means broken up parties. That it does, however, se- 
cure to the voters a free chance to express their views has been 
most markedly shown. . . 

In 1904, though the state went Republican for President by 
92,000 it went Democratic for Governor by nearly 36,000 on the 
same day and on the same ballots, while again Mr. Curtis Guild, 
Jr., a Republican candidate for Lieutenant Governor was elected 
by 30,000 plurality on the same ballot on the same day, a shifting 
of about 126,000 votes. . . 

As to the complaint that there is a falling off from the head 
of the ticket because the voters get tired and stop from sheer 
fatigue, it is, to be sure, generally true that there is a falling 
off from the head of the ticket, but this is by no means universally 
true. A careful analysis of the votes will disclose the fact that 
voters voted for those offices that interested them, and over 
which there had been some canvass, no matter where located on 



The Ballot 223 

the ballot. It also clearly shows a popular vote against the long 
ballot, which we still have in our State elections in Massachu- 
setts. . . 

As to the claim that the one whose surname begins with "A" 
has an advantage over the one whose name begins with " W" in 
the same group on the ballot, there is just a slight basis of fact 
for this contention. In some minor offices, over which there is 
no contest, especially where four or five vacancies of the same 
kind in the same group are to be filled, such as members of school 
committees, assessors of taxes and the like, and especially where 
the candidates have been nominated on non-partisan or citizens' 
tickets, an initial letter early in the alphabet has been an advan- 
tage. But even in these minor offices this has not been true 
where there has been a public contest, as has been proved over 
and over again. . . 

Now, as to the popularity of the system in Massachusetts, 
we can say that though several attempts have been made to 
adopt the party column and single mark system, they have al- 
ways been defeated by a large majority, — so large some five or 
six years ago that no one has even attempted to introduce a bill 
in the Legislature to go over to the party column system. In 
the State election the towns of Massachusetts must use the Aus- 
tralian system but in their town elections they vote in any way 
they please. We have a singularly strong proof of the popularity 
of the system in the fact that two-thirds of all the towns in 
Massachusetts, including every single town of any large popu- 
lation, have voluntarily adopted the Massachusetts form of Aus- 
tralian ballot. The only exceptions are the little towns of 400 to 
600 inhabitants, who all know each other and vote in a very in- 
formal manner. The method is also used in the election of over- 
seers at Harvard University and almost universally throughout 
the state. 

To sum up, under the Massachusetts system, the ballots are 
rapidly and easily marked, there is no delay or blocking even at 
very large precincts. The voters are not kept from voting, but 



224 Readings on Parties and Elections 

on the contrary more come to the polls than before the system 
was adopted. The less educated, and even those accustomed 
chiefly to manual labor, mark their ballots intelligently and 
clearly. There is little falling off in the vote from the head of 
the ticket to offices lower down, except for those offices that do 
not interest the public ; but even there, in no way of itself, does 
this falling off influence results. On the other hand each office 
gets separate consideration and this tends to raise the character 
of the nominations for the less important onices on the ticket. 
The alphabetical order makes practically no difference in cases 
where the public has an opinion to express, and the system is 
popular with the people. Even the party workers have to pro- 
fess to like it, whether they do or not. 

4. THE FEDERAL ACT REQUIRING WRITTEN OR PRINTED BALLOTS 
FOR THE ELECTION OF MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE OF 
REPRESENTATIVES r 

Due to the Federal character of our government the form 
of ballot is primarily in the control of the states. Even the 
form of ballot for election of members of the national House of 
Representatives is under the control of the states with the ex- 
ception that the ballot must be written or printed. 

Chap. CXXXIX. An act to amend an Act approved 
February twenty-eighth, eighteen hundred and seventy-two, 
amending an Act approved May thirty-one, eighteen hundred 
and seventy, entitled "An Act to enforce the Rights of Citizens 
of the United States to vote in the several States of this Union, 
and for other Purposes." 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
the United States of America in Congress assembled, That sec- 
tion nineteen of an act to amend an act approved May thirty- 
first, eighteen hundred and seventy, entitled " An Act to enforce 

1 United States Statutes at Large, Vol. 17, p. 61, May 3, 1872. 



The Ballot 11 



the rights of citizens of the United States to vote in the several 
States of this Union, and for other Purposes," and amended act 
approved February twenty-eighth, eighteen hundred and 
seventy-one, shall be, and hereby is, amended so as to read as 
follows: "See. 19. That all votes for Representatives in Con- 
gress shall hereafter be by written or printed ballot, any law of 
any State to the contrary notwithstanding; and all votes re- 
ceived or recorded contrary to the provisions of this section shall 
be of none effect : Provided, That this section shall not apply to 
any State voting otherwise whose elections for said Representa- 
tives shall occur previous to the regular meeting of its legislature 
next after the approval of said act." 
Approved, May 3, 1872. 

5. BALLOT REFORM! NEED OF SIMPLIFICATION 1 

The large number of offices filled by election is becoming 
an increasing source of complaint. Ballot simplification, by 
separating elections, by filling some of the offices otherwise 
than by election and by various other means is urged as one 
way by which popular interest in elections and a greater feeling 
of responsibility by those elected may be secured. 

The theory of an election, I take it, is somewhat as follows : It 
is known that on a certain day the people are to select an officer 
to perform on their behalf certain duties and to hold certain 
powers. The office is made desirable by reason of the salary 
and honor and power attached to it. Various aspirants for the 
place come before the public by one method or another, make 
known their qualifications for the office, explain the policies 
which they desire to put into effect through the power attached 
to that office, and the voters go to the polls on election day and 
indicate on the ballot which of the aspirants they prefer. 
This process constitutes an election as fondly imagined by 

1 Childs, R. S., Proceedings of the American Political Science Association 
Vol. VI, 1909; pp. 65-70. 
Q 



226 Readings on Parties and Elections 

those who first framed our various constitutions and charters. 
This idea of an election is perfectly sound and perfectly practical. 
It has, however, certain distinct limitations based on familiar 
facts of human nature, and in the United States these limitations 
have been stupidly overstepped. 

The theory of an election, as outlined, presupposes that the 
voter is to have an opportunity to get some kind of acquaintance 
with the claims of the various aspirants for the office. If he fails 
to do this, it is inevitable that his vote will be unintelligent and 
easily controlled by those who have an interest in the election. 

If the voter in a large community is to know the candidates, 
it is necessary that the latter secure a proper amount of publicity 
so that each candidate shall become in the mind of the voter 
a definite mental picture — a picture so definite that the voter 
will develop a preference based on adequate information. It 
must be evident that there is a limit to the number of elections 
which can be held simultaneously without blurring these mental 
pictures. Any man must admit, for instance, that it would not 
be practical to hold ioo real elections on one day. No voter 
could remember several hundred candidates even if he tried to 
do so in systematic fashion, and a system which put the names of 
several hundred candidates for a hundred offices upon the ballot 
(without the aid of some guide or trademark label) would result 
in confusion, out of which emerge as victors, not the candi- 
dates who were most successful in getting votes, but those who 
were least ^successful. It would be like letting school children 
vote, and the result would have no significance as an expression 
of opinion. 

The same condition will be true of a ballot which has much 
less than ioo places to be filled. It will be true, in part at least, 
at any election where a non-partisan ballot would be impracti- 
cable. If you apply this test of leaving off the party labels, 
you will see by analyzing the resulting bewilderment, to just 
what extent the people are ruling, and to what extent they are 
being led by a ring in their nose. 



The Ballot 227 

Take the ballot you voted at the last election ! Cut it up with 
a pair of shears and paste it together with the party labels elimi- 
nated, so that for the office of county clerk, for instance you will 
be compelled to choose between Smith and Jones and Robinson. 
If on looking over this ballot you find that you are lost without 
the party label to guide you, that your vote for certain offices 
was without knowledge or intelligence, to that extent you will 
know you have not been exercising control, but have, by a kind 
of proxy-giving, delegated your share of the control of those 
offices to some one else. Extend the same examination to the 
entire electorate and you will see to what extent it has proven a 
failure as an instrument of popular control of government. 

A voter who votes blindly is being bossed. Very few voters, 
even the illiterate, vote a ballot entirely blindly. Even the 
Italian street digger probably has certain reasons for supporting 
A or B for governor ; but every American citizen, with the excep- 
tion of the professional politicians, votes blindly on certain parts 
of his ballot, and is to that extent being bossed. 

The wide acceptance of bossism is commonly denounced as 
"apathy" or " indifference," and people say "the citizens are 
asleep and only the politicians are awake." It is an ancient 
libel. American citizens are as a whole no more apathetic than 
the citizens of any other democratic nation. If the burghers of 
Glasgow were brought in a body to Philadelphia, and compelled 
to hold a few elections under the present Philadelphia system, 
they would get the same kind of government that the Phila- 
delphians are now getting for themselves. And likewise, if the 
people of Philadelphia were transferred to Glasgow, the govern- 
ment of that city would continue to be one of the best in the 
world year after year and election after election. Human nature 
is the same in Philadelphia and Glasgow. The essential dif- 
ference is only in the size and character of the burden of partici- 
pation thrown upon the electorate. If you argue differently 
you must be prepared to prove that the flood changed the human 
nature of the people of Galveston. The city of Houston ad- 



228 Readings on Parties and Elections 

vertises that its city hall is run like a business office. Once it 
was run like a political hang-out. Did the adoption of the 
commission plan of government suddenly change the character 
of the people of Houston ? 

Apathy, indifference, are relative, depending entirely upon 
how much is demanded. Suppose, for instance, there were but 
one polling place for an entire city, so that the citizens must 
travel considerable distances on election day in order to cast their 
votes. Immediately we should confront the phenomenon of a 
decreased vote — more " apathy" as compared with the present 
condition, where there is a polling place at every barber shop. 

Suppose we put the polling place ten miles out of town on the 
top of a mountain so that every citizen had to go out and scram- 
ble all day to get there — we should have a still smaller vote. 
Most of the citizens would stay in town and attend to their own 
business, and the reformers would say in disgust "the citizens 
are supremely apathetic and indifferent and won't do their duty." 
Yet the people of the town are the same people all the time — 
no more really apathetic than when the full vote turned out on 
election day under the other conditions. 

That is what I mean by saying that apathy is relative, depend- 
ing entirely upon how much is required. 

We have made our politics even more inaccessible to the people 
than I have described when I put the polling place on the moun- 
tain top. If you and I could, by walking 10 miles and climbing 
a mountain once a year become effective participants in politics, 
it is not at all unlikely that we would make the effort. But we 
have a system of politics so elaborate by reason of the multiplic- 
ity of elective offices, that politics has come to be considered a 
separate profession. That is the very climax of inaccessibility ; 
it removes politics to a distance equivalent to a year's journey. 

Every citizen knows that, reformers to the contrary, little 
is gained in the effectiveness of the citizen by attendance at 
caucuses and primaries. A citizen must become so familiar with 
political workings, so strenuous in his opinions and in his politi- 



The Ballot 229 

cal activity, that he becomes a member of the little conclave 
that meets previous to the caucuses, to set the tables for the 
electorate, before he begins to exercise any real control over the 
business of nomination and election. He can do that only at 
the serious sacrifice of other business. In consequence, the men 
who become and remain effective politicians are either men who 
find in politics satisfactory remuneration, or else the leisure class 
including millionaires and tramps. 

The hope of America does not lie with any such class as this, 
but rather with the men whose time is too valuable to permit 
them to go into politics. When we make politics a profession, 
we automatically exclude 95 per cent of the voters, — the great 
unbribable mass of the community. To restore control to 100 
per cent of the people, to secure democracy in place of govern- 
ment-by-politicians, we must so simplify politics that it will no 
longer constitute a separate profession ; we must simplify it until 
a busy man can, in his scanty spare time, become sufficiently 
versed in its mysteries to become effective. We must make 
politics accessible to the great bulk of our citizens. 

To simplify politics means that we must strive to approach 
our ideal of an election, where the candidates come forward, get 
a full hearing and each voter selects his favorite and has a reason. 

One test of practicability is the need for a "ticket" or a 
"label" to guide the voter; and when we call for the selection 
of 10, 20 or 30 officials on one day, we find that the people begin 
to vote by tickets, by party labels instead of by men, giving 
themselves over blindly to the guidance of politicians. 

But it is certainly possible to elect one man on one day in 
ideal fashion. Experience has demonstrated that beyond a 
doubt. The experience of certain western cities that are gov- 
erned by commissions of five elected on a non-partisan ballot 
shows that the average citizen can manage to select five separate 
favorite candidates without the aid of a ticket. Whether the 
exact limit is five or six or seven, is of course a matter that cannot 
be exactly demonstrated. But tickets have been used at times 



230 Readings on Parties and Elections 

in some of those cities, showing that five is at least near the bor- 
der line. 

Accessibility thus attained is not enough, however ; the people 
will not inevitably participate even if they can. Having led our 
horse to water we must get him to drink. For instance, suppose 
we elected a county clerk and no one else at a given election. 
There is an ideally short ballot — just a single place to be filled 

— a perfectly "accessible" bit of politics. Yet the ballot on 
that occasion would fail to gather the judgment of the people 
just as surely as if the county clerk were lost in a crowd of other 
minor officials at the bottom of a long ballot. The people with 
a few exceptions would not go to the polls or pay any attention 
to the matter, for the share of each voter in the matter of the 
county clerkship is too insignificant to deserve attention. The 
electorate shrugs its big shoulders and flatly declines to be 
bothered. 

So we face the problem of devising a system in which the peo- 
ple not only can participate but will participate. The impor- 
tance of the election must reach the consciousness of every voter. 
The way to bring this about is not by exhortation and prayer, 
but by giving real importance to the position that is to be filled 
so as to make it naturally conspicuous. For instance — the 
office of state assemblyman in New York is among the neglected 
positions. In actual practice this is now an appointive position 

— appointive by some self -established and irresponsible coterie 
of local politicians. Even in the off-years when the assembly- 
man is sometimes the only place on the ballot, experience shows 
that the people do not take control. The place cannot of course 
be made appointive by any other elective officer. The proper 
alternative is to increase the importance of the office. At pres- 
ent the assemblyman is a mere one one-hundred-and-fiftieth of 
one-half of a legislature, whose actions are closely circumscribed 
by the constitution and subject to the veto of the governor. 
Suppose that, following the experience of the cities, we substitute 
one chamber for the present bi-cameral system, and triple the 



The Ballot 231 

size of the districts. Each assemblyman would then be six 
times as important and, with his increased capacity for good or 
ill, would attract more criticism, more popular examination. 
If the people still fail to get excited over that office, cut the size 
of the assembly in half again, thrusting upon twenty-five men the 
responsibility of all legislation for a great state. And surely 
then, if not before, the office will reach a pinnacle of light where 
the whole electorate will see it and feel concerned about it, and 
where it will be beyond the grasp of the politicians. 

And so we have two practical limitations to our ideal of an 
election. 

1. The number of officials to be elected at any one time must 
be limited to five or less ; and 

2. The elective offices must be limited to those that are of 
such importance and character that the people will consent to 
exert themselves to make the selection themselves. 

In building a democracy everything else must be warped to fit 
these fundamental limitations. For these are the limitations of 
the people themselves. We cannot wait for human nature to 
change, we must order our institutions to fit human nature. 
There is no hope in putting a square collar on our horse and then 
condemning the horse for failure to grow a square neck. Ac- 
cordingly, while it may seem desirable to have a state treasurer 
elected so as to secure independent audit of accounts, we must 
secure protection in some different way if it is found in practice 
that the people do not select the state treasurer for themselves. 

It may seem desirable in a city, for various reasons, to have 
a large council elected at large; but that plan with all 
its advantages must be rejected on account of the supreme and 
unalterable disadvantage that in practice the real selecting under 
those conditions is not done by the voters. 

No matter how many reasons may be advocated for having all 
county officials independently elected, those reasons cannot 
stand against the overwhelming and unalterable disadvantage 
that those offices make so little appeal to the popular imagination 



232 Readings on Parties and Elections 

that the public in practice ignores them, and leaves the selection 
of those officials to be settled, without supervision, by anybody 
who volunteers. Deplore such wanton carelessness if you will, 
but the public is too big to be spanked. . . 

6. WOMEN AND THE SUFFRAGE * 

The grant of suffrage to women is as yet an experiment 
confined to the western part of the United States. Mrs. Julia 
Ward Howe long an advocate of increased political rights for 
women presents the argument in favor of a wider suffrage as 
follows. 

The question of suffrage for women has passed out of the 
academic stage, and has become a matter of practical observation 
and experience in an ever growing number of States and coun- 
tries. Experience has shattered, like a house of cards, all the 
old predictions that it would destroy the home, subvert the foun- 
dations of society, and have a ruinous influence both on womanly 
delicacy and on public affairs. During many years the oppo- 
nents of woman suffrage have been diligently gathering all the 
adverse testimony that they could find. So far as appears by 
their published literature, they have not found, in all our en- 
franchised States put together, a dozen respectable men, resi- 
dents of those States, who assert over their own names and ad- 
dresses that it has had any ill effects. A few say that it has done 
no good, and call it a failure on that ground. But the mass of 
testimony on the other side is overwhelming. 

The fundamental argument for woman suffrage, of course, is 
its justice ; and this would be enough were there no other. But 
a powerful argument can also be made for it from the standpoint 
of expediency. It has now been proved to demonstration, not 
only that woman suffrage has no bad results, but that it has cer- 
tain definite good results. 

1 Howe, Julia Ward, " The Case for Woman Suffrage. " Outlook, 
April 3, 1909; pp. 780-784. 



The Ballot 



*33 



1. It gives women a position of increased dignity and in- 
fluence. . . 

Miss Margaret Long, daughter of the ex-Secretary of the 
Navy, who has resided for years in Denver, has written : "It 
seems impossible to me that any one can live in Colorado long 
enough to get into touch with the life here, and not realize that 
women count for more in all the affairs of this State than they 
do where they have not the power that the suffrage gives. More 
attention is paid to their wishes, and much greater weight given 
to their opinions and judgment. . ." 

2. It leads to improvements in the laws. No one can speak 
more fitly of this than Judge Lindsey, of the Denver Juvenile 
Court. He writes: "We have in Colorado the most advanced 
laws of any State in the Union for the care and protection of the 
home and the children, the very foundation of the Republic. 
We owe this more to woman suffrage than to any one cause. It 
does not take any mother from her home duties to spend ten 
minutes in going to the polls, casting her vote, and returning to 
the bosom of her home ; but during those ten minutes she wields 
a power which is doing more to protect that home, and all other 
homes, than any other power or influence in Colorado. . ." 

3. Women can bring their influence to bear on legislation 
more quickly and with less labor by the direct method than by 
the indirect. In Massachusetts the suffragists worked for fifty- 
five years before they succeeded in getting a law making mothers 
equal guardians of their minor children with the fathers. After 
half a century of effort by indirect influence, only twelve out of 
our forty-six States have taken similar action. In Colorado, 
when the women were enfranchised, the very next Legislature 
passed such a bill. 

4. Equal suffrage often leads to the defeat of bad candidates. 
This is conceded by Mr. A. Lawrence Lewis, whose article in 
the Outlook against woman suffrage in Colorado has been re- 
printed by the anti-suffragists as a tract. He says : 

"Since the extension of the franchise to women, political 



234 Readings on Parties and Elections 

parties have learned the in advisability of nominating for public 
offices drunkards, notorious libertines, gamblers, retail liquor 
dealers, and men who engage in similar discredited occupations, 
because the women almost always vote them down." During 
the fifteen years since equal suffrage was granted no saloon- 
keeper has been elected to the Board of Aldermen in Denver. 
Before that it was very common. I quote again from Governor 
Shafroth, of Colorado: " Women's presence in politics has in- 
troduced an independent element which compels better nomina- 
tions. . ." 

5. Equal suffrage broadens women's minds, and leads them 
to take a more intelligent interest in public affairs. President 
Slocum, of Colorado College, Enos A. Mills, the forestry expert, 
Mrs. Decker, and many others bear witness to this. The Hon. 
W. E. Mullen, Attorney-General of Wyoming, who went there 
opposed to woman suffrage and has been converted, writes : "It 
stimulates interest and study, on the part of women, in public 
affairs. Questions of public interest are discussed in the home. 
As the mother, sister, or teacher of young boys, the influence of 
woman is very great. The more she knows about the obliga- 
tions of citizenship, the more she is able to teach the boys." A 
leading bookseller of Denver says he sold more books on political 
economy in the first eight months after women were given the 
ballot than he had sold in fifteen years before. 

6. It makes elections and political meetings more orderly. 
The Hon. John W. Kingman, of the Wyoming Supreme Court, 
says : "In caucus discussions the presence of a few ladies is worth 
a whole squad of police." 

7. It makes it easier to secure liberal appropriations for edu- 
cational and humanitarian purposes. In Colorado the schools 
are not scrimped for money, as they are in the older and richer 
States. So say Mrs. Grenfell, General Irving Hale, and others. 

8. It opens to women important positions now closed to 
them because they are not electors. Throughout England, 
Scotland, Ireland, and a considerable part of Europe a host of 



The Ballot 235 

women are rendering admirable service to the community in 
offices from which women in America are still debarred. 

9. It increases the number of women chosen to such offices 
as are already open to them. Thus, in Colorado women were 
eligible as county superintendents of schools before their en- 
franchisement ; but when they obtained the ballot the number 
of women elected to those positions showed an immediate and 
large increase. 

10. It raises the average of political honesty among the 
voters. Judge Lindsey says: " Ninety-nine per cent of our 
election frauds are committed by men." 

11. It tends to modify a too exclusively commercial view of 
public affairs. G. W. Russell, Chairman of the Board of Gov- 
ernors of Canterbury College, New Zealand, writes: "Prior to 
women's franchise the distinctive feature of our politics was 
finance. Legislative proposals were regarded almost entirely 
from the point of view of (1) What would they cost? and (2) 
What would be their effect from a commercial standpoint ? The 
woman's view is not pounds nor pence, but her home, her family. 
In order to win her vote, the politicians had to look at public 
matters from her point of view. Her ideal was not merely money 
but happy homes and a fair chance in fife for her husband, her 
intended husband, and her present or prospective family." 

12. Last, but not least, it binds the family more closely 
together. I say this with emphasis, though it is in direct op- 
position to an argument much brought forward by the opponents 
of woman suffrage. Let us give ear to words that are written, 
like the last, from a region where equal suffrage has been tried 
and proved. 

The Hon. Hugh Lusk, ex-member of the New Zealand Parlia- 
ment, says : " We find that equal suffrage is the greatest family 
bond and tie, the greatest strengthener of family life. It seemed 
odd at first to find half the benches at a political meeting occu- 
pied by ladies ; but when men have got accustomed to it they 
do not like the other thing. When they found that they could 



236 Readings on Parties and Elections 

take their wives and daughters to these meetings, and afterwards 
go home with them and talk it over, it was often the beginning 
of a new life for the family — a lif e of ideas and interests in com- 
mon and of a unison of thought. . ." 



7. AN ARGUMENT AGAINST WOMAN SUFFRAGE 1 

Even among those who would have their political rights 
extended by the grant of suffrage to women there is difference 
of opinion as to whether the move would be desirable. It is 
contended that the demand is neither logically well founded nor 
counselled by the results in those states which have adopted the 
proposed change. 

The question of woman suffrage can no longer be treated with 
indifference — it has already become a practical question. If 
women are to assume the duty of suffrage, they must either add 
it to their other duties or lay aside other duties to take up this 
new duty. Would either alternative be just to the women them- 
selves and the community at large ? It is for us to decide. In- 
difference is practically an influence in favor of the movement ; 
we should seriously, in the light of a sacred, duty, consider what 
the issue portends for ourselves and our fellow-beings. 

"Rights" is a word of much sound, but little meaning — since 
everybody's rights stop where another's commence, if there be a 
conflict between them. We are to consider a question of rights, 
woman's rights, the suffragists call it, but let us look into it and 
we see a threefold aspect : the rights demanded by the women 
who advocate suffrage; the rights of those women who oppose 
the movement ; the rights of the community at large, the Com- 
monwealth, the nation. 

We are to determine whether the claim of the first class to a 
natural, inherent right to vote, and its demand to exercise that 

1 M'Intire, Mary A. J., Of What Benefit to Women? Pamphlet printed 
by the Massachusetts Association Opposed to Extensions of Woman Suffrage 
(excerpt). 



The Ballot 237 

right, are : first, just ; second, expedient ; that is, not in con- 
flict, but in harmony, with the rights of the others. . . As 
to the justice of their claim to an inherent, natural right of which 
they are deprived, we answer that the right of suffrage is not 
inherent or inalienable. In all political history there is not one 
phrase which could be construed into meaning that men have 
the right of suffrage because they are human beings. Society 
does not exist by the consent of those who enter it. Our govern- 
ment was established long before the present generation existed ; 
so the consent of the governed must be taken for granted (except 
as changes are made by constitutional methods) until a rebellion 
arises. 

A government exists to secure the safety and best welfare of 
all who look to it for protection. The assumption that suffrage 
is a natural right is anti-republican, since the very essence of 
republicanism is that power is a trust to be exercised for the 
common weal, and is forfeited when not so exercised, or when 
exercised for private or personal ends. To deny this is to imply 
that our government is a pure, unmitigated democracy, which 
may be interpreted in two ways — either as tantamount to no 
government, or as the absolute despotism of the ruling majority 
in all matters. This is not American republicanism certainly, 
since republicanism has always aimed to restrain the absolute 
power of majorities and protect minorities by constitutional 
provisions. 

Suffrage cannot be the right of the individual, because it does 
not exist for the benefit of the individual, but for the benefit of 
the state itself. " Unless a doctrine is susceptible of being given 
practical effect, it must be utterly without substance" (Cooley's 
Constitutional Law) ; and this doctrine of inherent right cannot 
be given practical effect, since this would imply that minors, 
insane, idiots, Indians, and Chinese (now wholly or partially 
restrained) would have a right to exercise the franchise. A gift 
from nature must be absolute, and not contingent upon the 
state to prescribe qualifications, the possession of which shall be 



238 Readings on Parties and Elections 

the test of right of enjoyment ; and no restrictions of age or edu- 
cation could be put upon it, such as now exist. Liberty itself 
must come from law, and cannot, in any institutional sense, 
come from nature. Rights, in a legal sense, are born of re- 
straints, by which every one may be protected in this enjoy- 
ment within prescribed limits. In prescribing limitations the 
framers of the constitution showed that they did not consider 
suffrage an inherent right. The article of the bill of rights 
which refers to inalienable rights has nothing whatever to say 
about suffrage. 

The suffragists claim that women are taxed without represen- 
tation. Those advancing this argument exhibit their entire lack 
of understanding of the theories of taxation and suffrage, and 
prove that they, at least, are not yet ready to enter intelligently 
into politics. . . 

The duty of voting is in no sense dependent — in this state 
at least — upon the fact that the voter pays taxes or owns prop- 
erty. A man who has no property has the same voice in voting 
as a millionaire ! Property of a town, city, or state is justly 
liable for the current expenses of the government which protects 
such property, and thus increases and preserves its value. The 
only question the law asks is: "Is there property?" If so, it 
imposes a tax. The laws of taxation are general, and not partic- 
ular, taxation being simply a compensation to the government 
for protection of property, that such property may have value. 
Woman's property receives exactly the same protection as man's, 
and she benefits as much thereby ; there is therefore no injustice 
to her. 

Minors are taxed without being able to vote, and there are 
more minors than voters. Men between eighteen and twenty- 
one could quite as justly as women consider themselves wronged, 
for they are by a large majority capable of voting intelligently ; 
so also could those who are taxed upon property placed where 
they cannot vote. Women enjoy all the rights of citizens, pro- 
tection of property, use of public institutions, roads, gas, postal 



The Ballot 239 

facilities, etc. A vote would not protect her property, since two 
women with no property interests could more than annul her 
vote by theirs. There is not a single interest of women which 
is not shared by men. What is good for men — what protects 
their interests also protects women's. We may look to men to 
further what in their judgment seem the best interests of life and 
property, and in doing this they protect both man's and woman's 
interests because they are inseparable. 

Since women have not — for men have not — any natural 
right to vote, and cannot claim it on the ground of taxation with- 
out representation, it remains to be seen whether they can de- 
mand it on the ground of expediency. The pointing out of bene- 
fits always rests with those who demand a radical change in a 
system of government; not pointing out only, but proving. 
Will the franchise extended to women — first, benefit the whole 
community? second, gain definite benefits for women, which 
cannot be obtained in the existing order of things? 

The remonstrants to woman's suffrage cannot find stated in all 
the suffragists' arguments one definite, certain benefit to result 
to either state or woman. On what grounds of expedience do 
the suffragists demand the ballot? First, that society would 
gain, because woman would reform politics. The cause of tem- 
perance would be promoted by their vote. Woman's voice 
would abolish war. Second, that women would gain, since the 
ballot would be to them an educational factor. The problem of 
woman's wages would be solved. 

Would women reform politics ? Let us see ! In this country 
it is not a question, as it is in England, of the relatively intelli- 
gent and responsible women being allowed a share in the govern- 
ment. England restricts the use of the ballot (by women) in 
municipal affairs to those who pay rates and taxes in their own 
names. In our country where manhood suffrage exists it fol- 
lows that if suffrage belongs to women at all, it belongs to all ; 
suffrage must be given to all women or none, and such is the final 
proposition of the suffragists. If the franchise were granted to 



240 Readings on Parties and Elections 

women in America, all women of legal age, sound mind, and not 
disfranchised for special causes (now applying to men) could 
vote; not only the intelligent and those unburdened by home 
and business duties, but all women without respect to race, char- 
acter, or intelligence. 

We must not overlook or leave out the densely ignorant, the 
supinely indifferent, the trivial, the " occupied" women — out and 
out bad women (60,000 in New York City alone). The suffragists 
say, "Yes, that is true also of man ; " but it is surely evident that 
existing evils should not be added to simply because they exist, 
or that two unintelligent, bought, or corrupt votes are worse 
than one — on the simple ground of unnecessary outlay of means 
and energy, if nothing else. If the great mass of ignorant wo- 
men's votes are added to the great mass of ignorant men's votes, 
there will be constant unwise demands for work, money, bread, 
leisure, in short, "all kinds of laws to favor all kinds of persons." 
Colonel Higginson (who makes no positive claims for woman 
suffrage, save on the ground of natural right) acknowledges that 
" the ground taken that woman as woman would be sure to act 
on a higher plane than man as man is now urged less than for- 
merly, the very mistakes and excesses of the agitation itself hav- 
ing partially disproved it ; " and again — " while the sympathies 
of women are wholly on the side of right, it is by no means safe 
to assume that their mode of enforcing that sentiment will be 
equally judicious." 

As for temperance — there must be taken into consideration 
not only its advocates, and on the other hand those women who 
favor license through depravity (the most difficult class to deal 
with, vide kitchen bar-rooms in no-license cities), but the count- 
less number of foreign-born women brought up where liquors are 
used, and not abused, who would feel themselves cramped in 
their liberties under no-license law. 

"Woman's voice would abolish war." The Civil War was 
stimulated and encouraged by women in the north ; and it is 
generally conceded that but for the women of the south it would 



The Ballot 241 

have sooner ended. A suffragist is responsible for the statement 
that a mayor of a leading southern city lays the survival of duel- 
ling anywhere in the south to the sustaining public sentiment of 
women. I cannot better sum up the illusory nature of the 
benefits proposed by the suffragists than in again quoting from 
Colonel Higginson. In an article devoted to " Too much 
Prediction," he says: "I am persuaded that at present we 
indulge in too many bold anticipations !" 

We come to the question of the gain to woman personally. 
Is there anything to be gained which cannot be brought about 
with the existing franchise? The suffragists say: 1. Women 
will be educated by the ballot. 2. The problem of woman's 
wages will be solved. In regard to their first claim we need only 
ask, Has the ballot proved of much educational value to men ; 
then what are the probabilities as regards women ? 

The problem of woman's wages ! The ballot could not help 
the working girl in the way the suffragists claim, since legislation 
affects the business of the country only in a general way, help- 
ing or hurting all the workers alike in any special industry. The 
question of wages is one of supply and demand simply ! So the 
general wages of women will always depend greatly on the 
amount of skill acquired by the mass of them. What especially 
affects woman's wages is the temporary character of her work ! 
The average age of working women is twenty-two years, as de- 
termined by government investigation. You see what this 
means — that the ranks are constantly being filled up with raw, 
untrained girls, while those who have attained to some degree of 
skill are constantly dropping out. 

The natural expectation of every normal girl should be that 
sooner or later she will marry and leave her work ; therefore, 
there is not that incentive that men have to become highly skill- 
ful ; and the character of her work is, consequently, not so high 
generally speaking, as men's, lacking as it does, two factors, 
time and incentive, to develop great skill. Then, since the ma- 
jority of women take up work with the intention — conscious 

R 



242 Readings on Parties and Elections 

or unconscious — of devoting only a part of their lives to it, they 
naturally gravitate to such work as can be most easily made a 
temporary occupation, and competition comes in to help com- 
plicate the wage question. . . 

We have left one argument for granting woman the suffrage; 
namely, that a majority of women not wishing to vote should 
not be a sufficient reason for depriving a minority of an inborn 
right. We have summed up the other arguments for the fran- 
chise and shown what is to be said in their refutation ; but this 
last argument, it seems to me, contains the gist of the whole 
question that is, wherein the demands of the suffragists and the 
anti-suffragists clash. We have shown their error in claiming 
the franchise as an inherent right, but even were we to grant that 
such a right existed, it would still be perfectly within the power 
of the state to deprive women of this right, if by granting it the 
general good would be imperiled. We know that the state holds 
authority to deprive citizens of the right of property, of liberty, 
of life itself, if the common weal demand it. The family is the 
safeguard of the state, and the granting of the suffrage to women 
tends to weaken this mainstay of the nation by bringing into it 
elements of discord and disunion ; therefore the state would be 
more than justified in denying women even an inherent right 
which might prove thus disastrous. 

To the rest of the argument we answer that a majority of wo- 
men believe that their inherent rights and privileges would suffer 
if the duty of voting were imposed upon them, for the following 
reasons: because suffrage involves office-holding, which is in- 
consistent with the duties of most women; because they feel 
that their obvious duties and trusts — as sacred as any on earth 
— already demand their best efforts ; because the duties cannot 
be relegated to others; because political equality will deprive 
woman of special privileges hitherto accorded to her by law; 
because they hold that the suffrage would lessen rather than in- 
crease their influence for good. 

Suffrage involves office-holding. If women vote, they ought 



The Ballot 



243 



also to hold office, and assume the working duties incident to 
office. A system which tends to the dissolution of the home is 
more perilous to the general good than any other form of danger, 
and office-holding is, on the face of it, incompatible with woman's 
proper discharge of her duties as wife and mother. There is too 
little stress laid on this. No theory of womanly life is good for 
anything which undertakes to leave out the cradle. 

We cannot ignore the fact that nature has imposed upon wo- 
man the duty of bearing and rearing the race, and in so doing, 
has unfitted her (for a number of years at least) for holding polit- 
ical office. 

Many women there are, it is true, who are not wives and moth- 
ers and if women vote, there will be more of them. When polit- 
ical rewards are held out as the price of services in public life, 
many women — and those of the brightest — will be tempted 
to forego marriage and motherhood for the sake of winning 
them. . . 

Finally we oppose the suffrage for women, because we feel 
that we have more influence without it. There is not a single 
subject in which woman takes an intelligent interest in which 
she cannot exert an influence in the community proportionate 
to her character and ability. Without the ballot, women have 
obtained more than mere justice in Massachusetts. The num- 
ber of women who want the ballot for itself is reduced to a mere 
handful when we take away those who are working for temper- 
ance or other worthy causes. How much more would be gained 
by advocating these causes on their own merits ! 

The influence of woman standing apart from the ballot is 
immeasurable. Men look to her then (knowing that she has no 
selfish, political interest to further) as the embodiment of all 
that is truest and noblest. She has influence with all parties 
alike ; if a voter, she would have only the influence of her own 
party, even the woman's vote being divided against itself. We 
believe that it is of vital importance that our sex should have no 
political ends to serve ! 



244 Readings on Parties and Elections 

8. THE NEGRO'S RIGHT TO VOTE : ITS DENIAL l 

Due to the fact that the provisions of the constitution 
which protect the negro in his right to vote are directed against 
only state action, and even then only reach discrimination on 
account of race, color, and previous condition of servitude, it 
has been possible for the southern states practically to eliminate 
the influence of the colored voter in elections. 

First, how far is it practicable for the white people of any 
State to deny or abridge the right of suffrage of such inhabitants 
of that state as have negro blood in their veins because they have 
such negro blood ? Second, what can the Federal Government 
do to prevent discrimination on such ground ? 

The first of these questions may be answered by saying that in 
1900 there were in the two States of South Carolina and Missis- 
sippi 350,796 adult male negroes. The aggregate number of 
votes returned in both states for the Roosevelt and Fairbanks 
electoral ticket was 5443. At least 2000 of these 5443, and per- 
haps more, must have been cast by white men. It follows that 
in those states not more than one adult male negro out of every 
100 voted for President. It is clear, therefore, that it has in 
fact been possible for the white inhabitants of some of the states, 
for a time at least, so to abridge the right of suffrage on the 
ground of race and color as to deny that right substantially to 
all negroes. 

In the teeth of the provisions of the Federal Constitution how 
has this result been brought about? Why is it that the dis- 
franchised race has not been able successfully to appeal for pro- 
tection to the letter and spirit of the Federal Constitution. 
Answering generally, it may be said : first, because the powers 
of the Federal Government are limited; and, second, because 
Congress has not exercised those powers which the Federal 
Government has. 

1 Rose, J. C, " Negro Suffrage. " American Political Science Review, Vol. 
I, 1906-1907; p. 17 et seq. 



The Ballot 



2 45 



The Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments both expressly 
confer upon the Congress the power to enforce them by appro- 
priate legislation. The Supreme Court has held, and has been 
clearly right in holding, that the power to enforce cannot be ex- 
tended beyond that which is to be enforced. Neither of those 
amendments deal in any wise with the action of individuals in 
their individual capacity. They are both prohibitions upon 
the states or the United States. Beyond that they do not go, 
and Congress in enforcing them can do no more than to insure 
as best it may that the states shall not in any way or by any in- 
strumentality deny to their colored citizens the equal protection 
of the laws or deny or abridge the right of suffrage on account of 
race, color, or previous condition of servitude. 

Congress cannot provide for the punishment of individuals 
who, having no official position and exercising none of the powers 
of the State, prevent a colored voter from voting, or deny to him 
the equal protection of the laws. . . 

The Fifteenth Amendment does not prescribe qualifications for 
suffrage. That it leaves to the several States. They may make 
any they see fit, provided they do not deny or abridge the right 
of suffrage on account of race, color, or previous condition of 
servitude. 

A much larger proportion of whites than blacks may possess 
any particular qualification. That fact alone is no argument at 
all against the right of a State to prescribe it. The qualifica- 
tion may be one which reasonable people may think desirable, 
irrespective of whether the State has or has not any negro 
inhabitants at all. 

In South Carolina a simple educational qualification enforced 
with entire honesty and strict impartiality would disfranchise 
60,000 or 70,000 more negroes than whites. Under universal 
manhood suffrage there would be a negro majority in that State 
of upward of 20,000. If the right to vote was limited to those 
adult males who can both read an^ write, there would be a 
white majority of nearly 45,000. 



246 Readings on Parties and Elections 

Connecticut, in its Constitution, declares that no one shall 
vote unless he is able to read any section of the Constitution 
or of the statutes of the States in the English language and 
write his name. What Connecticut can do, so can South 
Carolina. . . 

No man can vote in Pennsylvania unless at least one month be- 
fore the election he has paid his poll or other tax. The amount 
of the poll tax and the time at which it must be paid each State 
may prescribe for itself. If Alabama sees fit to fix it at $1.50 
a year and to require that every voter must, six months before 
the day of election, have paid all poll taxes assessed against him 
for each and every year since 1900, it can do so. The payment 
of such a tax by other persons than the voter may easily be a 
form of bribery and corruption. The State may, therefore, prop- 
erly require the voter to pay his poll tax in person. Such re- 
quirements in Alabama would close the door of the polling room 
to more blacks than whites. . . 

All the southern states which have recently adopted new con- 
stitutions make the payment of a poll tax a condition precedent 
to the exercise of the right of suffrage. In none of the states is 
the annual tax less than one dollar. In none greater than two 
dollars. 

North Carolina does not require the payment of any back 
taxes except those for the year preceding that in which the voter 
offers to vote. Louisiana and Mississippi provide that he must 
pay for the preceding two years, and Virginia for the preceding 
three years. Alabama is content with nothing short of the pay- 
ment of all poll taxes levied on him since the year 1901. 

The clauses of the South Carolina Constitution on the subject 
are to my reading ambiguous. They may be construed either 
as requiring the payment of all poll taxes which have been as- 
sessed against the voter, or only those for the preceding year. 
What construction they have received in practice I do not know. 

In some of these states at least the poll tax is apparently im- 
posed rather to. discourage voting than to raise revenue. Thus 



The Ballot 247 

the Constitution of Alabama declares that no legal process or any 
fee or commission shall be allowed for the collection of the poll 
tax. Louisiana says that poll taxes shall be a lien only upon 
assessed property and no process shall issue to enforce the col- 
lection of the same except against assessed property. All the 
states require the payment of these taxes to be made a long time 
before the election. 

In North Carolina, South Carolina, and Virginia the payment 
must be made at least six months before election day, in Alabama 
and Mississippi before the first of February preceding the elec- 
tion ; and in Louisiana on or before the thirty-first of the pre- 
ceding December. 

Any adult male negro who has not forfeited his right of suf- 
frage by conviction of crime, who has paid his poll taxes as re- 
quired by law, and who possesses the qualifications of residence 
required of all other voters is in theory at least entitled to vote 
in Mississippi if he can read the Constitution of that state ; in 
Virginia, North and South Carolina, and Louisiana if he can 
read and write; in Alabama if he can read and write and has 
been regularly engaged in some lawful employment, business, 
occupation, trade, or calling for the greater part of the twelve 
months preceding the time at which he offers to register; in 
Louisiana and South Carolina if he be the owner of real and per- 
sonal property assessed at $300, whether he can read and write 
or not ; and in Alabama, though he cannot read or write, and 
whether he has been employed or not, if he or his wife own forty 
acres of land on which they live, or if either he or she have real 
or personal property of the assessed value of $300, or more. 

A negro Republican in any one of those States would very prob- 
ably reply that however reasonable the qualifications may seem 
in theory, in practice there are so many difficulties thrown by 
the registration officers in the way of the registration of negro 
voters that none except those who have a liberal allowance of 
time, patience, persistence, intelligence, and money can succeed 
in getting on the registration books. He might refer to such a 



248 Readings on Parties and Elections 

provision as that of the Alabama Constitution which authorizes 
the register to require the applicant to state under oath the name 
or names of all his employers for the last five years, and makes 
any wilfully false answer perjury. He might not unreasonably 
contend that the purpose of such a provision was to render it al- 
most impossible for negro laborers safely to apply for registra- 
tion. This may be true, but if true it is not relevant to the in- 
quiry whether it is within the power of the state to prescribe 
the qualifications it has prescribed. . . 

Speaking generally, it may be said that in every one of the 
six southern states which have adopted new constitutional regu- 
lations for the suffrage, those regulations have been so framed or 
administered that no white man who was a voter at the time they 
went into effect has been disfranchised by them. Sometimes the 
white voters have been protected by the very terms of the new 
constitutions. Thus, Louisiana and North Carolina declare that 
all men who were voters in any state of the Union before Janu- 
ary 1, 1867, and in Louisiana the sons and grandsons of such 
men, not less than 21 years of age in 1898, and in North Carolina 
all lineal descendants of such men who were or may become voters 
before 1908 shall remain for life qualified to vote in spite of the 
fact that they may not possess either the educational or the 
property qualifications, one or the other of which is required of 
all other voters. 

Every one knows that this so-called " grandfather clause" 
was devised solely for the purpose of exempting all white men 
from the necessity of showing that they possessed those qualifi- 
cations which were required of all negroes. It is possible to 
argue that the ability to vote in such manner as is conducive to 
the best interests of the state may in some rough and general 
way be hereditary. This was a contention, however, which was 
made when the Fifteenth Amendment was under consideration, 
and the adoption of that Amendment decided it finally in the 
negative. 

If North Carolina and Louisiana forms of the "grandfather 



The Ballot 249 

clause" shall come before the Supreme Court of the United States 
in such a way as to make it the right and duty of that court to 
pass upon their validity, I personally believe that they will be 
held invalid. 

The corresponding clause in Virginia is more skillfully drawn. 
It authorizes the registration of every non-property owning illit- 
erate, who prior to the adoption of the new Constitution of Vir- 
ginia had served in time of war in the army or the navy of the 
United States, or of the Confederate States, or who is a son of 
any one who did so serve. While this qualification in Virginia 
is possessed by many more white than black men it would in- 
clude an appreciable number of the latter. It might, therefore, 
very possibly be held valid. . . 

In Alabama, in addition to the "grandfather clause" already 
referred to, the boards of registry were given the opportunity to 
protect white voters by a provision that in addition to those 
qualified under the "grandfather clause" the only persons who 
should be entitled to vote upon the adoption of the new Consti- 
tution were those persons who were of good character and who 
understood the duties and obligations of citizenship under a re- 
publican form of government. On the face of this qualification 
what could be fairer ? No one ought to vote who is not of good 
character, and who does not understand the duties and obliga- 
tions of citizenship under a republican form of government. 
How fortunate is the state which can organize in each county a 
board of registry capable of determining who among their fel- 
low-citizens are and who are not of good character, and who do 
and who do not understand the duties and obligations of citizen- 
ship under a republican form of government ! 

We all know why this unlimited discretion was given to the 
Board of Registry in Alabama. Yet the constitution of Con- 
necticut has since 1818 required that an elector in that state shall 
sustain a good moral character. For upward of a century the 
constitution of Vermont has declared that only persons of quiet 
and peaceable behavior shall be admitted to be freemen in any 



250 Readings on Parties and Elections 

town of that state. It is true that no one has heard that in 
either Connecticut or Vermont any one, except possibly some 
utterly notorious offender, has ever been disfranchised because 
he was not of good moral character, or was not of quiet and peace- 
able behavior. There is much reason to believe that in Alabama 
a very large number of persons were unable to convince the Board 
of Registry that they were of good character and that they un- 
derstood the duties and obligations of citizenship under a re- 
publican form of government, or at all events that they would 
have been unable to convince the Board of Registry had they 
thought it worth while to try to do so. On its face, however, 
this provision is not a discrimination on account of race, color, 
or previous condition of servitude. 






IX. Party Problems and Remedies 

I. PARTY INFLUENCE IN FEDERAL APPOINTMENTS * 

Considerations of party expediency have transformed the ap- 
pointing power of the President. Responsibility for the char- 
acter of the administration required that the President should 
control the officers charged with carrying out his policies. The 
advice of the senate taken in the filling of orifices was not in- 
tended to control the appointments and virtually dictate them. 
The growth of party control has however shifted the balance of 
power in choosing appointive officials to the upper house. 

As the President is charged with the whole Federal adminis- 
tration, and responsible for its due conduct, he must of course 
be allowed to choose his executive subordinates. But as he 
may abuse this tremendous power the Constitution associates 
the Senate with him, requiring the "advice and consent" of that 
body to the appointments he makes. This confirming power 
has become a political factor of the highest moment. The 
framers of the Constitution probably meant nothing more than 
that the Senate should check the President by rejecting nominees 
who were personally unfit for the post to which he proposed to 
appoint them. The Senate has always, except in its struggle 
with President Johnson, left the President free to choose his 
cabinet ministers. But it early assumed the right of rejecting 
a nomineeto any other office on any ground which it pleased, as, 
for instance, if it disapproved his political affiliations, or wished 
to spite the President. Presently the senators from the State 
wherein a Federal office to which the President had made a nomi- 

1 Bryce, J., The American Commonwealth. Macmillan, New York, 1910; 
Vol. I, pp. 61-65. 

251 



252 Readings on Parties and Elections 

nation lay, being the persons chiefly interested in the appoint- 
ment, and most entitled to be listened to by the rest of the Senate 
when considering it, claimed to have a paramount voice in decid- 
ing whether the nomination should be confirmed. Their col- 
leagues approving, they then proceeded to put pressure on the 
President. They insisted that before making a nomination to an 
office in any State he should consult the senators from that State 
who belonged to his own party, and be guided by their wishes. 
Such an arrangement benefited all senators alike, because each 
obtained the right of practically dictating the appointments to 
those Federal offices which he most cared for, viz. those within 
his own State; and each was therefore willing to support his 
colleagues in securing the same right for themselves as regarded 
their States respectively. Of course when a senator belonged 
to the party opposed to the President, he had no claim to in- 
terfere, because places are as a matter of course given to party 
adherents only. When both senators belonged to the President's 
party they agreed among themselves as to the person whom they 
should require the President to nominate. By this system, 
which obtained the name of the Courtesy of the Senate, the 
President was practically enslaved as regards appointments, 
because his refusal to be guided by the senator or senators within 
whose State the office lay exposed him to have his nomination 
rejected. The senators, on the other hand, obtained a mass of 
patronage by means of which they could reward their partisans, 
control the Federal civil servants of their State, and build up a 
faction devoted to their interests. Successive Presidents chafed 
under the yoke, and sometimes carried their nominees either by 
making a bargain or by fighting hard with the senators who 
sought to dictate to them. But it was generally more prudent 
to yield, for an offended senator could avenge a defeat by play- 
ing the President a shrewd trick in some other matter ; and as 
the business of confirmation is transacted in secret session, in- 
triguers have little fear of the public before their eyes. The 
senators might, moreover, argue that they knew best what would 



Party Problems and Remedies 253 

strengthen the party in their State, and that the men of their 
choice were just as likely to be good as those whom some private 
friend suggested to the President. Thus the system throve and 
still thrives, though it received a blow from the conflict in 188 1 
between President Garfield and one of the New York Senators, 
Mr. Roscoe Conkling. This gentleman, finding that Mr. Garfield 
would not nominate to a Federal office in that state the person 
he proposed, resigned his seat in the Senate, inducing his co- 
senator Mr. Piatt to do the same. Both then offered themselves 
for re-election by the State Legislature of New York, expecting 
to obtain from it an approval of their action, and thereby to 
cow the President. The State Legislature, however, in which a 
faction hostile to the two senators had become powerful, re- 
jected Mr. Conkling and Mr. Piatt in favour of other candidates. 
So the victory remained with Mr. Garfield, while the nation, 
which had watched the contest eagerly, rubbed its hands in glee 
at the unexpected denouement. 

It need hardly be added that the "Courtesy of the Senate" 
would never have attained its present strength but for the growth, 
in and since the time of President Jackson, of the so-called Spoils 
System, whereby holders of Federal offices have been turned out 
at the accession of a new President to make way for the aspirants 
whose services, past or future, he is expected to requite or secure 
by the gift of places. 

The right of the President to remove from office has given rise 
to long controversies on which I can only touch. In the Con- 
stitution there is not a word about removals; and very soon 
after it had come into force the question arose whether, as re- 
gards those offices for which the confirmation of the Senate is 
required, the President could remove without its consent. 
Hamilton had argued in the Federalist (though there is reason 
to believe that he afterwards changed his opinion) that the Presi- 
dent could not so remove, because it was not to be supposed that 
the Constitution meant to give him so immense and dangerous 
a reach of power. Madison argued soon after the adoption of 



254 Readings on Parties and Elections 

the Constitution that it did permit him so to remove, because 
the head of the executive must have subordinates whom he can 
trust, and may discover in those whom he has appointed defects 
fatal to their usefulness. This was also the view of John Mar- 
shall. When the question came to be settled in the Senate dur- 
ing the presidency of Washington, Congress, influenced perhaps 
by respect for his perfect uprightness, took the Madisonian view 
and recognized the power of removal as vested in the President 
alone. So matters stood till a conflict arose in 1866 between 
President Johnson and the Republican majority in both Houses 
of Congress. In 1867 Congress, fearing that the President 
would dismiss a great number of officials who sided with it against 
him, passed an Act, known as the Tenure of Office Act, which 
made the consent of the Senate necessary to the removal of office- 
holders, even of the President's (so-called) cabinet ministers, 
permitting him only to suspend them from office during the time 
when Congress was not sitting. The constitutionality of this 
Act has been much doubted, and its policy is now generally con- 
demned. It was a blow struck in the heat of passion. When 
General Grant became President in 1869, the Act was greatly 
modified, and in 1887 it was repealed. 

How dangerous it is to leave all offices tenable at the mere 
pleasure of a partisan Executive using them for party purposes, 
has been shown by the fruits of the Spoils System. On the other 
hand a President ought to be free to choose his chief advisers 
and ministers, and even in the lower ranks of the civil service 
it is hard to secure efficiency if a specific cause, such as could be 
proved to a jury, must be assigned for dismissal. 

The Constitution permits Congress to vest in the Courts of 
Law or in "the heads of departments" the right of appointing 
to "inferior offices." This provision has been used to remove 
many posts from the nomination of the President, and by the 
Civil Service Reform Act of 1883 competitive examinations were 
instituted for about 34,000. Of the now enormous number of 
posts — there were, in 1909, 367,794 officers and employees of 



Party Problems and Remedies 255 

the executive civil service — nearly two-thirds were in that year 
subject to such examinations. A great number, however, in- 
cluding many postmasterships and many places under the 
Treasury, remain in the gift of the President; while even as 
regards those which lie with his ministers, he may be invoked if 
disputes arise between the minister and politicians pressing the 
claims of their respective friends. The business of nominating 
is in ordinary times so engrossing as to leave the chief magis- 
trate of the nation little time for his other functions. 

Artemus Ward's description of Abraham Lincoln swept along 
from room to room in the White House by a rising tide of office 
seekers is hardly an exaggeration. From the 4th of March, 
when Mr. Garfield came into power, till he was shot in the July 
following, he was engaged almost incessantly in questions of 
patronage. Yet the President's individual judgment has little 
scope. He must reckon with the Senate; he must requite the 
supporters of the men to whom he owes his election : he must so 
distribute places all over the country as to keep the local wire- 
pullers in good humour, and generally strengthen the party by 
" doing something" for those who have worked or will work for 
it. Although the minor posts are practically left to the nomina- 
tion of the senators or congressmen from the State or district, 
conflicting claims give infinite trouble, and the more lucrative 
offices are numerous enough to make the task of selection labori- 
ous as well as thankless and disagreeable. In every country 
statesmen find the dispensing of patronage the most disagreeable 
part of their work; and the more conscientious they are, the 
more does it worry them. No one has more to gain from a 
thorough scheme of civil service reform than the President. The 
present system throws work on him unworthy of a fine intellect, 
and for which a man of fine intellect may be ill qualified. On 
the other hand the President's patronage is, in the hands of a 
skilful intriguer, an engine of far-spreading potency. By it he 
can oblige a vast number of persons, can bind their interests to 
his own, can fill important places with the men of his choice. 



i $6 Readings on Parties and Elections 

The authority he has over the party in Congress, and therefore 
over the course of legislation, the influence he exerts on his party 
in the several States, and therefore over the selection of candi- 
dates for Congress, is strengthened by his patronage. Unhap- 
pily, the more his patronage is used for these purposes, the more 
it is apt to be diverted from the aim of providing the country 
with the best officials. 

2. MACHINE POLITICS IN THE LINCOLN ADMINISTRATION x 

Party control of appointments, made possible by party con- 
trol of the senate, became by the middle of the nineteenth cen- 
tury so strong an influence that not even President Lincoln 
could resist its force. He felt that some of the appointments 
he was constrained to make contradicted the principles for 
which he had stood through all his life. 

"Machine Politics" on a large scale began with the opening 
of the Civil War. Prior to that time, the operations of all our 
governments, national, state, and local, involved the handling 
of comparatively small amounts of money. Then, for the first 
time, did the operations of the national government furnish a 
field for fraud and corruption on a large scale. Then, for the 
first time, under the administration of Mr. Lincoln, we have the 
evidence of the omnipotence of the election machine. 

In connection with the facts now to be related, we must con- 
tinually bear in mind that Mr. Lincoln's purity of purpose — 
his personal integrity — and his sincerity and earnestness in 
using the powers of his office for what he deemed the highest 
public interests are universally conceded. Consequently, we 
are compelled to conclude, that if he was unable to resist the 
power of the election machine, that power is practically irre- 
sistible. 

Immediately after Mr. Lincoln's election began the inevitable 

1 Stickney, A., Organized Democracy. Houghton, New York, 1906; p. 
118 et seq. 



Party Problems and Remedies 257 

division of the "spoils," which has been, for well-nigh a century, 
the invariable sequel of the election of a new President. 

Mr. Lincoln's nomination, as is well known, was procured by 
a political barter. It is a well-authenticated fact, that a bar- 
gain had been made by Mr. Lincoln's political friends, at the 
Chicago convention which nominated him, that the vote of the 
Pennsylvania delegation in that convention should be paid for 
— by the appointment of Simon Cameron to a seat in the Cab- 
inet. Whether or not Mr. Lincoln knew and approved the bar- 
gain before his election, has been questioned. But it is the his- 
toric fact, that he carried out the bargain afterwards, with full 
knowledge of the facts, by making Mr. Cameron his Secretary 
of War. 

Mr. Lincoln did this in opposition to the remonstrances of a 
number of the most reputable men in his own party. Those 
men represented to Mr. Lincoln, that the character and repu- 
tation of Mr. Cameron were so bad, that no administration could 
endure the disgrace of such appointment. . . 

Mr. Lincoln's own opinion of Mr. Cameron was so bad as to 
make him think that the mere appointment of Mr. Cameron 
by him to a cabinet position would of itself destroy his own great 
reputation for honesty. According to his biographer, he said : — 

All that I am in the world — the Presidency and all else — 
I owe to that opinion of me which the people express when they 
call me Honest Old Abe. Now what will they think of their 
honest Abe when he appoints Simon Cameron to be his familiar 
adviser ? 

At the time of Mr. Cameron's appointment, we were at the 
opening of a great war, on which depended the nation's existence. 
The War Secretaryship was the most important office in the na- 
tion. It demanded a man of great ability, and of unquestioned 
integrity. Success in the war would be largely a matter of 
money. Upright and able administration of the War Office was 
certain to be the most important thing in the entire admin istra- 



258 Readings on Parties and Elections 

tion. Nevertheless, Mr. Lincoln gave the headship of the War 
Office to a man who was notoriously and scandalously corrupt. 
Of that fact he was fully advised in advance. . . 

As already said, Mr. Lincoln's purity of purpose and earnest- 
ness of endeavor are conceded on all hands. We must assume, 
that he did everything in his power to insure an honest adminis- 
tration of our national affairs. For he, and every intelligent 
man, well understood that success in putting down the rebellion 
was largely a question of money ; and that it was of vital neces- 
sity that the strictest economy should be used in the manage- 
ment of our Army and Navy, and of the nation's finances. 

Bearing all that in mind, let us see what were the practical 
results of his so-called " political appointments." 

The government was compelled to purchase large quantities 
of material of all kinds, arms and supplies for the Army, and 
vessels for the transport service and the Navy. . . 

The purchasing of vessels for the Navy Department at the 
port of New York was taken from the commandant of the navy- 
yard there, and transferred to a man of whom a House of Repre- 
sentatives Committee say, that he had 

never had the slightest experience in the new and responsible 
duties which he was called upon to discharge, either in the naval 
service, the building or buying and selling of sHips, or in any pur- 
suit calling for a knowledge of their construction, capacity, or 
value, never having spent an hour in either. . . 

Five thousand carbines belonging to the government were 
sold to a private individual for $3.50 apiece, and were immedi- 
ately repurchased for the government for $22 apiece, making a 
difference on this one transaction of nearly $90,000. One lot of 
these carbines went through this process of sale and repurchase 
twice. They were first sold by the government at a price merely 
nominal, and were repurchased at $15 apiece. They were again 
sold by the government at a price above stated, of $3.50, and 
again repurchased at $22, How many other times these arms 



Party Problems and Remedies 259 

did service under the purchase and sale treatment, or whether 
they ever did service in the field, did not appear. 

A certain contractor testified that he furnished supplies to 
the government to the amount of $800,000, on which he made a 
profit of over forty per cent. The purchases from him were 
made in direct violation of law. . . 

Two steamers were purchased by a friend of high government 
officials for about one hundred thousand dollars, and were im- 
mediately sold to the government for two hundred thousand 
dollars. One steamer was chartered to the government for two 
thousand five hundred dollars a day ; and the government paid 
one hundred and thirty-five thousand dollars for a period during 
which she lay at a wharf before she was ever once used. One 
railroad company received for transportation in one year from 
the government over three million five hundred thousand dol- 
lars, being an excess over the company's entire earnings for the 
previous year of one million three hundred and fifty thousand 
dollars, or about forty per cent. And the rates charged for this 
transportation were about thirty-three and one-third per cent 
in excess of the rates paid by private individuals. The brother- 
in-law of the president of this railroad company was Mr. Lin- 
coln's Secretary of War. 

These are merely single instances of the way in which the Peo- 
ple's money was wasted by the party leaders and their political 
supporters. . . 

But political influence went further than controlling the treas- 
ury and the War and Navy departments. It controlled the 
appointment of our generals. Machine politicians aspired to 
the glory of the soldier, for political purposes. They were men 
without either education or experience. One of them at least 
had never in his life so much as handled a battalion or a company 
on a parade ground. Men of this kind were given generals' com- 
missions, and the command of armies ; and through their igno- 
rance and incapacity thousands of better men than themselves 
lost their lives. 



160 Readings on Parties and Elections 

In all departments, throughout the war, the plunder of the 
treasury by machine politicians proceeded on true machine 
principles. The people's offices were used, not for the service 
of the people, but for the service of the election machine, to re- 
ward machine men for machine work. 

3. LIMITING PARTISAN ACTIVITY OF OFFICEHOLDERS. UNITED 
STATES CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION, JULY, 1 9 10 l 

The evil effect of the " spoils system" upon our public life 
has aroused men interested in good government to persistent 
effort to remove from active party work those who are in gov- 
ernment service. Public offices must not be made the forts of 
the party army. The rules limiting the evil of the activity of 
officeholders, prescribed by the Civil Service Commission, have 
been an important influence in eliminating abuses. 

I. Political Activity 

Activity of competitive employees and laborers forbidden: 
Persons who by the provisions of these rules are in the com- 
petitive classified service, while retaining the right to vote as 
they please and to express privately their opinions on all political 
subjects, shall take no active part in political management or in 
political campaigns. (Rule I, sec. i.) 

Temporary employees are held to be within the restrictions 
of the rule. 

On May 14, 1908, the Navy Department issued the following 
circular letter to commandants of navy-yards and naval stations : 

Laborers and mechanics at the yard or station under your 
command will be subject to discharge for political activity in 
the same manner as competitive classified employees. 

Similar instructions have been issued by other departments plac- 
ing the same limitations in regard to political activity on laborers 
in the unclassified service as are applied to competitive employees. 

The following forms of activity have been held to be forbidden 

1 Pamphlet published by the Civil Service Commission. 



Party Problems and Remedies 261 

by this provision : Service on political committees ; service as 
delegates to county, state, or district conventions of a political 
party, although it was understood that the employees were not 
"to take or use any political activity in going to these conven- 
tions or otherwise violate the civil-service rules"; service as 
officer of a political club, as chairman of a political meeting or 
as secretary of an antisaloon league ; continued political activity 
and leadership ; activity at the polls on election day ; the pub- 
lication or editing of a newspaper in the interests of a political 
party; the publication of political articles bearing on qualifica- 
tions of different candidates ; the distribution of political litera- 
ture ; holding office in a club which takes active part in political 
campaigns and management ; making speeches before political 
meetings or political clubs ; circulation of petitions having politi- 
cal object, of petitions proposing amendments to a municipal 
charter, of petitions favoring candidates for municipal offices, 
and of local-option petitions ; service as a commissioner of elec- 
tion in a community where it was notorious that a commissioner 
of election must be an active politician ; accepting nomination 
for political office with intention of resigning from the competi- 
tive service if elected; recommendation by clerks and carriers 
of a person to be postmaster ; activity in local-option campaigns ; 
service as inspector of elections, ballot clerk, ballot inspector, 
judge of election, member of election board; candidacy for or 
holding of elective office. . . 

Restrictions on the political activity of other government 
officers : 

On July 14, 1886, President Cleveland issued the following 
instructions, which were published at the time as orders by the 
heads of the several departments : 

Officeholders are the agents of the people, not their masters. 
Not only is their time and labor due to the Government, but 
they should scrupulously avoid, in their political action, as well 
as in the discharge of their official duty, offending, by display of 



262 Readings on Parties and Elections 

obtrusive partisanship, their neighbors who have relations with 
them as public officials. 

They should also constantly remember that their party friends, 
from whom they have received preferment, have not invested 
them with the power of arbitrarily managing their political 
affairs. They have no right as officeholders to dictate the polit- 
ical action of their party associates or to throttle freedom of 
action within party lines by methods and practices which per- 
vert every useful and justifiable purpose of party organization. 

The influence of federal officeholders should not be felt in the 
manipulation of political primary meetings and nominating 
conventions. The use by these officials of their positions to 
compass their selection as delegates to political conventions is 
indecent and unfair, and proper regard for the proprieties and 
requirements of official place will also prevent their assuming 
the active conduct of political campaigns. 

Individual interest and activity in political affairs are by no 
means condemned. Officeholders are neither disfranchised nor 
forbidden the exercise of political privileges ; but their privi- 
leges are not enlarged nor is their duty to party increased to 
pernicious activity by officeholding. 

A just discrimination in this regard between the things a citi- 
zen may properly do and the purposes for which a public office 
should not be used is easy in the light of a correct appreciation 
of the relation between the people and those intrusted with 
official place and a consideration of the necessity, under our 
form of government, of political action free from official coercion. 

Under date of June 5, 1902, the commission addressed a letter 
to the President in which it called attention to the omission in 
the new postal regulations, issued April 1, 1902, of former sec- 
tion 435, providing that — 

Officeholders should not offend by obtrusive partisanship, 
nor assume the active conduct of political campaigns. . . . 
This is in consonance with the order of President Cleveland of 
July 14, 1886. 

The commission also called the President's attention to the 
following statement in its Eleventh Report : 

The commission feels strongly that whatever rule is adopted 



Party Problems and Remedies 263 

should apply equally to adherents of all parties, and that it 
would be safe to adopt as such a rule the requirement that the 
adherents of the party in power shall never do what would cause 
friction in the office and subvert discipline if done by the op- 
ponents of the party in power. A man in the classified service 
has the entire right to vote as he pleases and to express privately 
his opinions on all political subjects, but he should not take any 
active part in political management or in political campaigns, 
for precisely the same reasons that a judge, an army officer, a 
regular soldier, or a policeman is debarred from taking such ac- 
tive part. It is no hardship to a man to require this. It leaves 
him free to vote, think, and speak privately as he chooses, but it 
prevents him, while in the service of the whole public, from turn- 
ing his official position to the benefit of one of the parties into 
which that whole public is divided; and in no other way can 
this be prevented. 

The commission recommended either that a general executive 
order upon the subject be issued by the President or that recom- 
mendation be made to the heads of departments for the es- 
tablishment of regulations similar to the post-office regulation 
which had been omitted. 

The following reply was received under date of June 13, 1902 : 

Gentlemen : As the greater includes the less, and as the exec- 
utive order of President Cleveland of July 14, 1886, is still in 
force, I hardly think it will be necessary again to change the 
postal regulations. 

The trouble, of course, comes in the interpretation of this 
executive order of President Cleveland. After sixteen years 
experience it has been found impossible to formulate in precise 
language any general construction which shall not work either 
absurdity or injustice. Each case must be decided on its merits. 
For instance, it is obviously unwise to apply the same rule to the 
head of a big city federal office, who may by his actions coerce 
hundreds of employees, as to a fourth-class postmaster in a small 
village, who has no employees to coerce and who simply wishes 
to continue to act with reference to his neighbors as he always 
has acted. 

As Civil Service Commissioner under Presidents Harrison and 
Cleveland I found it so impossible satisfactorily to formulate 



264 Readings on Parties and Elections 

and decide upon questions involved in these matters of so-called 
pernicious activity by officeholders in politics that in the 
Eleventh Report of the commission I personally drew up the 
paragraph which you quote. This paragraph was drawn with a 
view of making a sharp line between the activity allowed to 
public servants within the classified service and those without 
the classified service. The latter under our system are, as a rule, 
chosen largely with reference to political considerations, and, as 
a rule, are and expect to be changed with the change of parties. 
In the classified service, however, the choice is made without 
reference to political considerations and the tenure of office is 
unaffected by the change of parties. Under these circum- 
stances it is obvious that different standpoints of conduct apply 
to the two cases. In consideration of fixity of tenure and 
of appointment in no way due to political considerations the 
man in the classified service, while retaining his right to vote as 
he pleases and to express privately his opinions on all political 
subjects, "should not take any active part in political manage- 
ment or in political campaigns for precisely the same reasons 
that a judge, an army officer, a regular soldier, or a policeman is 
debarred from taking such active part." This, of course, applies 
even more strongly to any conduct on the part of such employee 
so prejudicial to good discipline as is implied in a public attack 
on his or her superior officers, or other conduct liable to cause 
scandal. 

It seemed to me at the time, and I still think, that the line 
thus drawn was wise and proper. After my experience under 
two Presidents — one of my own political faith and one not — 
I had become convinced that it was undesirable and impossible 
to lay down a rule for public officers not in the classified service 
which should limit their political activity as strictly as we could 
rightly and properly limit the activity of those in whose choice 
and retention the element of political considerations did not 
enter; and afterwards I became convinced that in its actual 
construction, if there was any pretense of applying it impartially, 
it inevitably worked unevenly, and, as a matter of fact, inevi- 
tably produced an impression of hypocrisy in those who asserted 
that it worked evenly. Officeholders must not use their offices 
to control political movements, must not neglect their public 
duties, must not cause public scandal by their activity; but 
outside of the classified service the effort to go further than this 
had failed so signally at the time when the Eleventh Report, 



Party Problems and Remedies 265 

which you have quoted, was written, and its unwisdom has been 
so thoroughly demonstrated that I felt it necessary to try to draw 
the distinction therein indicated. 

Sincerely yours, 

Theodore Roosevelt. 

II. Political Coercion 
The civil-service act contains the following provisions : 

... no person in the public service is for that reason under 
any obligations to contribute to any political fund, or to render 
any political service, and ... he will not be removed or other- 
wise prejudiced for refusing to do so. (Sec. 2, clause 2, par. 5.) 

... no person in said service has any right to use his official 
authority or influence to coerce the political action of any per- 
son or body. (Sec. 2, clause 2, par. 6.) 

The following is a provision of the civil-service rules : 

No person in the executive civil service shall use his official 
authority or influence for the purpose of interfering with an 
election or affecting the result thereof. (Rule 1, sec. 1.) 

III. Political Assessments 

The following are provisions of the Criminal Code : 

... no Senator, or Representative, or Territorial Delegate 
of the Congress, or Senator, Representative, or Delegate elect, 
or any officer or employee of either of said Houses, and no 
executive, judicial, military, or naval officer of the United States, 
and no clerk or employee of any department, branch, or bureau 
of the executive, judicial, or military or naval service of the 
United States shall, directly or indirectly, solicit or receive, or be 
in any manner concerned in soliciting or receiving, any assess- 
ment, subscription, or contribution for any political purpose 
whatever from any officer, clerk, or employee of the United 
States, or any department, branch, or bureau thereof, or from 
any person receiving any salary or compensation from moneys 
derived from the Treasury of the United States. (Sec. 118.) 

... no officer or employee of the United States mentioned in 
this act shall discharge, or promote, or degrade, or in any manner 



i66 Readings on Parties and Elections 

change the official rank or compensation of any other officer or 
employee, or promise or threaten so to do, for giving or with- 
holding or neglecting to make any contribution of money or 
other valuable thing for any political purpose. (Sec. 120.) 

... no officer, clerk, or other person in the service of the 
United States shall, directly or indirectly, give or hand over to 
any other officer, clerk, or person in the service of the United 
States, or to any Senator or Member of the House of Represen- 
tatives, or Territorial Delegate any money or other valuable thing 
on account of or to be applied to the promotion of any political 
object whatever. (Sec. 121.) 

... no person shall, in any room or building occupied in the 
discharge of official duties by any officer or employee of the 
United States mentioned in this act, or in any navy-yard, fort, 
or arsenal, solicit in any manner whatever, or receive, any con- 
tribution of money or any other thing of value for any political 
purpose whatever. (Sec. 119.) 

Whoever shall violate any provision of the four preceding 
sections shall be fined not more than five thousand dollars, or 
imprisoned not more than three years, or both. (Sec. 122.) 

All offenses which may be punished by death, or imprison- 
ment for a term exceeding one year, shall be deemed felonies. 
All other offenses shall be deemed misdemeanors. (Sec. 335.) 

Solicitation by Letter 

In the. case of U.S. v. Edward S. Thayer the Supreme Court, 
on March 9, 1908, held that solicitation by letter or circular 
addressed and delivered by mail or otherwise to an officer or 
employee of the United States at the office or building in which 
he is employed in the discharge of his official duties is a solicita- 
tion "in a room or building," etc., within the meaning of sec- 
tion 12 of the civil-service act (now section 119 of the Criminal 
Code), the solicitation taking place where the letter was re- 
ceived. 



Party Problems and Remedies 267 

4. THE PRESENT FEDERAL CIVIL SERVICE AND ITS NEED OF 
FURTHER REFORM 1 

The large army of federal employees formerly at the serv- 
ice of the party in power has been decreased in size by laws and 
executive orders which have placed an increasingly large pro- 
portion of our public servants under civil service examination. 
The officeholders are assured fixity of tenure of office during 
good behavior. Recent administrations have widely extended 
the number of offices in which this principle applies. Much 
still remains to be done. 

The labors of the National Civil Service Reform League have 
been rewarded during the administrations of President Roose- 
velt and President Taft by the attainment of many improve- 
ments in the national service. To-day about 294,000 employees 
of the government are in the classified service, of whom about 
226,000 are competitive and most of whom have been appointed 
for merit and promise demonstrated through adequate examina- 
tions and thorough inquiry. About 68,000 persons in the classi- 
fied service have, however, been appointed on exceptional terms, 
with exemption from examination or without competitive exami- 
nation — a grievous fact which cannot but gravely qualify the 
satisfaction of this League in the results already obtained in 
the lower grades of the national civil service under existing 
legislation. 

The unclassified service numbers about 61,000 persons, of 
whom 49,000 are unskilled laborers, and 2,600 are census ap- 
pointees. Deducting these 51,600 persons from the total of the 
unclassified service, there remain something more than nine 
thousand presidential appointees who are subject to confirmation 
by the Senate, and in this number are included all the higher 
officers, such as first, second, and third class postmasters, collec- 

1 Eliot, C. W., Annual Address as President of the National Civil 
Service Reform League, at the meeting Dec. 16, 17, 1910. Good Govern- 
ment, New York, January, 191 1. 



268 Readings on Parties and Elections 

tors of customs and internal revenue, appraisers, district at- 
torneys and marshals, consuls, and diplomatic appointees. 
These nine thousand are all political appointments, or spoils of 
victory at the polls. . . 

Thus much ... is clear : — the higher places in the govern- 
ment service, to the number of nine thousand, are inaccessible 
to the 294,000 men and women who have entered the classified 
service. However meritorious these subordinate servants of 
the government may prove themselves to be, they cannot 
reach higher posts without procuring the active influence of a 
patron, or without commending themselves in some way to the 
persons in whose gift the higher offices lie. The original appoint- 
ments in the classified service are made for merit; but there- 
after advance of salary and promotion must be secured, as a 
rule, by "influence," and the higher parts of the national service 
are in the main inaccessible to members of the classified service. 

It has been an immense gain that the original appointments 
to 226,000 places have been rescued from the grasp of politicians, 
and made accessible in a thoroughly democratic way to compe- 
tent men and women; but so long as promotions generally go 
by favor, and not by merit, and so long as there are many thou- 
sands of persons in the classified service who have been exempted 
from passing examinations at appointment, or have passed only 
non-competitive examination, the civil service of the United 
States cannot be said to offer an attractive life-career to intelli- 
gent and ambitious young people, and will remain inferior as a 
career to many services in this country, already organized and 
conducted on a merit system by numerous business and educa- 
tional corporations and charitable or betterment associations. 
A service which has no system of promotion for merit, and no 
system of pensions or retiring allowances, and in which all the 
higher posts are held on short tenures and without personal or 
official independence, is obviously very inferior not only to most 
government services in Europe, but to many private and cor- 
porate services in the United States, which have already adopted 



Party Problems and Remedies 269 

advancement for merit, insurance against disease and accident, 
and pensions on disability or old age. 

In consequence of this unfortunate condition of things, many 
young people, of good quality as regards both intelligence and 
character, enter the national service by examination, serve dili- 
gently for a few years, and then, finding themselves cut off from 
the higher places in their several departments, quit the service 
of the govenment, and find employment in private or corporation 
services which are much better organized than the civil service 
of the national government. By this exodus the government 
is constantly losing the best part of its employees. The civil 
service ought, of course, to offer just as satisfactory and honor- 
able a career as the military and naval services offer ; but is far 
from doing so, first, because no system of promotion for merit 
has ever been contrived for the civil service, and secondly, be- 
cause the nine thousand posts at the top of the civil service are 
still political "spoils." 

The work of the National Civil Service Reform League has 
been supposed by many public-spirited persons, who are not 
acquainted with the facts in the case, to have been practically 
accomplished ; but the truth is, that the work of the League is 
only well begun, and its most important work remains to be 
done. . . 

It has been the practice of all the administrations since the 
civil service law was enacted to make appointments to excepted 
positions in the classified service without conforming to the pre- 
scriptions concerning examinations. These exceptions carry 
into the classified civil service many persons who have given 
no proper evidence of either capacity or character ; and put at 
the disposition of politicians or other patrons annual salaries 
to a large amount in total. The commonest argument in favor of 
these exceptions is that officials who have fiduciary functions 
want to have assistants selected either by themselves or by 
friends who have personal knowledge of the candidates. This 
argument is not a remarkable one. A fiduciary officer will in 



270 Readings on Parties and Elections 

most cases get a better assistant, if he is supplied by a civil serv- 
ice commission with a man or woman whose character, habits 
and mental quality have been subjected to an impartial examina- 
tion by experienced examiners, than he will procure through his 
own individual selection. Accordingly, experience concerning 
delinquencies, neglects, and crimes in the civil service of the 
United States shows conclusively that they occur among the 
excepted appointees and in the unclassified service much more 
frequently than in the competitive, classified service. The 
best man to trust in a confidential capacity is the man who is 
not afraid to have his previous training and experience and his 
capacity and character inquired into by impartial and experi- 
enced examiners. 

A strong argument in favor of extending the classified service 
all the way up to those offices which have to do with the deter- 
mination of the political policies of the government is to be found 
in the political activity at nominating conventions and elections 
of the existing unclassified service — that is, of all the higher 
civil servants of the government. Officials who owe their ap- 
pointments to political influence, who hold them as rewards 
for party service, naturally feel under obligations to be active 
on behalf of the administration, party, "boss," senator, or repre- 
sentative, who gave them their appointments. Every recent 
national administration has thus far accepted the political serv- 
ices of such officials without restraint during nomination and 
election campaigns; and there have recently been given st lik- 
ing exhibitions of the effective response of " spoils" civil servants 
to the call of their respective patrons, seeking to control party 
conventions in the state of New York and in several of the South- 
ern States. Several Presidents have forbidden political activity 
to members of the classified civil service; but no President has 
effectively forbidden members of the unclassified service that 
is, all the higher officials in the service, to be active in nomi- 
nating conventions and political campaigns. So long as the 
American people see thousands of officeholders exerting them- 



Party Problems and Remedies 271 

selves to the utmost to keep their party, their immediate ad- 
ministrative superiors, and themselves in power, so long will 
they distrust a permanent civil service with tenure during effi- 
ciency and good behavior. All intelligent persons can see that 
a permanent civil service, which can afford a satisfactory life- 
career to its members, must be ready to serve whatever chief 
officers of the government may be put in power by popular elec- 
tion, and must therefore be prohibited from engaging in party 
political activities — just as appointed judges and officers of 
the army and navy are now prohibited from participation in 
political conflicts by custom and by their own self-respect and 
desire for independence. 

Obnoxious political activity is not the only abuse which would 
be done away with, if the civil service were classified all the way 
up to the executive offices which have to do with determining 
the policies of the government. In the present unclassified 
service there is a great deal of absenteeism. Many men ap- 
pointed for political reasons, without any test of their capacity 
or fidelity, are not only frequently absent from duty, but are in 
the habit of hiring assistants or clerks at low wages to do all, or 
nearly all, the work of their office, taking to themselves the 
greater part of the compensation provided for their offices, but 
doing none, or very little, of the work. Under a merit system 
of appointment and promotion, these evils would not occur. 

Again, if every department of government were organized on 
the merit system as a. business office, another obvious bad tend- 
ency in democracies would be checked, namely, the tendency 
to create sinecures, or offices with pay but no function. In this 
respect democracies tend to outdo aristocracies; but the sine- 
cures created by democracies are usually in the lower grades of 
government employment, rather than in the higher. A merit 
system of appointment and promotion honestly applied would 
soon do away with the thousands of sinecures which now exist 
in the national, state and municipal governments of the United 
States. 



272 Readings on Parties and Elections 

In order to secure a satisfactory civil service from bottom 
to top, something more than good methods of inquiry into the 
merits of candidates for appointment and promotion is clearly 
needed, namely, a proper system of probationary appointments 
and promotions. No appointment should be made, and no pro- 
motion given, except on probation for a specified period. The 
effect on a given man of securing a desired appointment or pro- 
motion can seldom be predicted with certainty, and moreover, 
one who has succeeded in a lower station is not sure of succeed- 
ing in a higher. Hence, probationary appointments are an 
indispensable part of a sound organization which proposes to 
secure fidelity and efficiency. 

This League has been interested for several years in the dis- 
cussion concerning pensions, or retiring allowances, in the civil 
services of the country, national, state and municipal ; and has 
endeavored through reports of committees to contribute to the 
progress of the discussion. It believes that some method of re- 
tiring disabled or superannuated officials in a humane and there- 
fore practicable way is essential to the best efficiency of any per- 
manent service; but it sees difficulties in the way of applying 
any pension system to the United States civil service in its pres- 
ent condition. Until men in the lower grades of the service have 
access to the higher grades, the lower grades themselves will not 
attract or keep the most intelligent and ambitious men ; and 
in consequence it will sometimes be difficult to fill the higher 
grades from the lower. The higher officials, on the other hand, 
being all political appointments with uncertain tenure, are no 
fit candidates for long-service pensions. Again, existing laws 
usually prescribe a fixed number of clerks or assistants in each 
of several grades to be distributed among the Washington de- 
partments, leaving to the heads of the departments no discretion 
as to the number of clerks of each class to be employed in the 
several departments. If a vacancy occurs in one of the higher 
classes of clerks, it is the interest of the department to keep good 
the number of clerks in that class. If the vacancy is caused by 



Party Problems and Remedies 273 

the retirement of a disabled or superannuated official, the cost 
of any pension or retiring allowance given to him is a clear addi- 
tion to the cost of the total active service ; whereas, if the head 
of the department had discretion as to the number of clerks of 
each class that he employed, a pension granted to a retiring 
official might not increase at all, or but very little, the total ex- 
penditure for clerical service within the department. In any 
well-arranged administrative staff the payment of a pension to a 
retiring official will not cause an immediate additional expense 
to its full amount ; because the person retired is usually replaced 
by a much cheaper employee at the other end of the scale, and 
the pension is never equal to the salary of the person retired. 
The fixed number of clerks of each class in the Washington de- 
partments prevents this sort of economical adjustment. 

An active discussion has lately been in progress concerning 
the best form of pension, some of the interested persons advocat- 
ing a simple pension paid outright by the government, like the 
national pensions for judges and army and navy officers ; while 
others advocate the establishment in case of the government of 
a retirement fund to be derived from annual reserves from the 
salaries of all employees, or from these annual reserves and con- 
tributions from the government. This League has taken active 
part through a committee in this discussion. The members of 
the classified civil service, many of whom are keenly interested 
in this subject, are themselves divided on the question, which is 
the best form of pension. On the whole, it seems to your Presi- 
dent wisest to concentrate the activities of the League on the 
improvement of the civil service itself, through extension of the 
merit system and faithful execution of all the laws on the subject, 
and to await the disappearance of the unclassified part of the 
service before it should itself actively urge the establishment of 
any pension system whatever. 



274 Readings on Parties and Elections 

5. LEGAL REPRESSION OF POLITICAL CORRUPTION 1 

The repression of political corruption is a task difficult 
not only because opportunities for its practice are numerous 
but because all those directly affected; feel it to their interest to 
conceal its existence. Where political feeling runs high too, a 
jury trial will seldom result in a conviction which will command 
general respect, and even the courts have not always shown the 
degree of nonpartisanship present in other classes of suits. 

Not merely dishonesty, therefore, not merely crime, but dis- 
honesty and crime systemized, reduced to a science, practiced 
not as an occasional offense, but as a daily occupation by men in 
office and others out of office who have banded together to enrich 
themselves by debauching their government and corrupting its 
servants ; — this is the central, striking, characteristic feature 
of political corruption. It is not a case of a bribe given or taken 
today and another next week, with no connection between the 
two offenses; it is bribery organized into a profession and fol- 
lowed as a steady means of livelihood. Everywhere, whether 
in Harrisburg or San Francisco, in St. Louis or Milwaukee, the 
procedure is the same. Only the size of the bribe fund varies. 
The methods employed are everywhere alike. Upon the inside 
a ring of public officials who compose a majority of the common 
council, county board or State legislature, as the case may be, 
and upon the outside a band of corrupt capitalists and business 
men, and dominant over all a political boss assisted by flying 
squads of trained and experienced lobbyists drilled in the busi- 
ness of collecting corruption funds from the bribe-givers and 
distributing them among the bribe-takers who compose the ring. 

As no single cause has called this institution into existence, 
so no remedy alone will completely eradicate it. Education, 
moral suasion, enlightened political action directed against it — 
all these and others are effective cures within certain limitations. 

1 McGovern, F. E., Proceedings of the American Political Science Asso- 
ciation. 1907; pp. 266-276. 



Party Problems and Remedies 275 

But without legal repression to break the ground and pave the 
way for them these remedies have nowhere proved successful. 
General denunciation of graft is safe, but ordinarily quite ineffec- 
tual. Specific denunciation of political corruption is never 
safe unless it be either accompanied or preceded by successful 
prosecution of the individual denounced. Besides, scolding 
never pays, never reforms ; while even to the dullest mind prison 
stripes inculcate the appropriate moral lesson. 

In the work of putting corruptionists behind prison bars the 
first and most indispensable requirement is an honest grand jury. 
Without the assistance of such an agency political corruption has 
nowhere been successfully exposed. . . 

Not only is the grand jury charged with the special duty of 
accusing those who have directly wronged the public, but it also 
has at its disposal the means for properly accomplishing this 
work. Without stating its reasons or outlining its purposes, it 
may compel the attendance of witnesses and the production of 
books and documents. It meets in secret and usually enjoins 
secrecy also upon all who appear to testify before it. Thus its 
action cannot easily be anticipated, influenced, forestalled or 
frustrated, as proceedings before an examining magistrate may be; 
for secrecy of procedure is the one essential prerequisite to the 
obtaining of legal evidence of this species of crime. 

Second only in importance to the employment of grand juries 
as a legal agency for the repression of political corruption is the 
assistance furnished by immunity laws. Such statutes have been 
devised as substitutes for the constitutional privilege against 
compulsory self-incrimination, and while fulfilling this legal re- 
quirement also compel the disclosure of evidence of crime which 
otherwise would go unpunished. 

Bribery, which is by far the most frequent offense involving 
political corruption, is essentially a crime of darkness. As a rule 
but two persons have knowledge of it, the bribe-giver and the 
bribe-taker. Of disinterested spectators there are none. In- 
stead, the parties to a bribery transaction contrive to meet in 



276 Readings on Parties and Elections 

secret, there arrange the details of their compact in private and 
leave behind no record or memorandum of it. Each is equally 
guilty, and each has the strongest motive, therefore, for con- 
cealing the crime. In the absence of an immunity statute, for 
either to disclose the transaction may result in his own prosecu- 
tion ; for in such case his admission of guilt can be used against 
him, while as to his partner in crime it would be mere hearsay, 
not evidence. Under these circumstances the punishment of 
this and kindred offenses has often been placed practically be- 
yond the power of the law. 

To meet this situation and to enable those charged with the 
enforcement of penal statutes to cope with crime of the sort here 
under consideration, immunity laws have been enacted. If it 
be said that it is unjust that bribe-givers should be permitted to 
go free while bribe-takers are sent to prison, or vice versa, the 
answer is, that it is better that one of two guilty persons should 
be given immunity than that both should escape prosecution, 
and a crime which strikes at the very foundation of free institu- 
tions should go entirely unwhipped of justice. . . 

Provided with an honest grand jury and armed with an im- 
munity law, any community can, if it will, root out and expose 
political corruption so far as legal agencies are capable of un- 
covering and arraigning at the bar of justice crime of any sort. 
But the conviction and punishment of those arraigned is a far 
more difficult task. 

This is so from the very nature of the case. In bribery, 
for example, the testimony of the accomplice or partner in crime, 
when clear and convincing, is always sufficient for indictment, 
but may prove inadequate at the trial. The defendant, whether 
guilty or innocent, can, if he will, oppose his oath to that of his 
accuser as to every material circumstance in the case and sum- 
mon to his assistance from among his friends the full comple- 
ment of witnesses who will swear to his former good character 
and unspotted reputation. It is true that sometimes there may 
be additional corroborative facts upon the side of the prosecu- 



Party Problems and Remedies 277 

tion ; but ordinarily the case will go to the jury upon the oath 
of the State's principal witness, in opposition to that of the ac- 
cused. The situation of this witness, moreover, is not above 
criticism, nor can his credibility be placed beyond question. Of 
necessity he is a self-confessed criminal, whom, if his testimony 
be true, the immunity law alone keeps outside of prison bars. 
Then, too, there are always the presumption as to the defendant's 
innocence and the burden of proof resting upon the State to es- 
tablish his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Under these cir- 
cumstances is it strange that in many cases where good people 
are well satisfied there was guilt there should be acquittals at the 
close of jury trials ? 

In such cases, however, the mere fact of prosecution is not 
without significance. Though ultimately unsuccessful a public 
trial may have accomplished all or nearly all that a conviction 
could. Here the facts are laid bare beneath the eye of the whole 
community, and public opinion draws its inferences from such 
facts quite independently of the verdict of the twelve men who 
happened to sit as jurors in the case. And, after all, the break- 
ing up of a vicious system and the elevation of the standard of 
official honesty, not the punishment of any man or set of men, 
are the important things. 

In like manner great good may be accomplished and a real 
victory for honest government won, wherever official miscon- 
duct is even fairly, impartially and fearlessly charged with crime. 
In a country such as ours, public opinion is unquestionably a 
mighty force. Anything which goes to mold it by arousing 
public attention and directing public thought to specific wrongs 
which threaten the State, is of the highest significance and value. 
The average person, moreover, who commits bribery, or any of 
the crimes which involve political corruption, suffers quite as 
much punishment as a conviction can impose before his case is 
even called for trial. Exposure and disgrace, the deserved es- 
trangement of old time friends, the inevitable and almost un- 
conscious suspicion of even his nearest kindred, his own remorse, 



278 Readings on Parties and Elections 

heightened and intensified a hundred fold because of an awakened 
public conscience — these are the things, more than prison 
stripes, which strike deepest into the heart and most mortally 
wound the pride of the average man who has risen in business or 
official station sufficiently high to have an opportunity or a mo- 
tive for the commission of this species of crime. 

I speak now, of course, only of those who, though guilty in 
fact, cannot be or have not been convicted. That there are 
many such no well informed person can doubt. Manifestly 
the great danger here, however, is that innocent men may be 
unjustly accused under circumstances which make it very diffi- 
cult, if not impossible, for them completely to vindicate them- 
selves. In such cases great and even irreparable harm may be 
done. The only safeguard against this possibility is the exer- 
cise of caution and sound judgement, equal care at all times for 
the rights of the accused and the State, and the prosecution of 
no one for a merely technical offense in which there is not also 
moral turpitude. 

In the work of prosecuting these quasi-political offenders 
serious obstacles, of course, are encountered at every turn. 
From the beginning to the end, not only of each case, but of each 
campaign against official dishonesty, they line the road at almost 
every point. 

First in order of treatment, though possibly not of importance, 
is incompetence, timidity and disloyalty on the part of prosecut- 
ing officers. An illustration of what I mean was recently fur- 
nished in this State in a case where a district attorney was re- 
moved from office by the governor because of his refusal to prose- 
cute indictments for bribery which had been returned by the 
grand jury of his county. Fortunately instances of this kind 
are rare. But when they occur the gravity of the situation needs 
no comment. If the man who must bear the chief burden of 
this work is not equipped or lacks relish for his task, little in- 
deed can be expected in the way of accomplishment. 

Next and more important among these obstacles are weak 



Party Problems and Remedies 279 

and perverse juries, both grand and petit. Some trial juries 
seem to be immune to evidence of crimes involving official dis- 
honesty and refuse to convict no matter how overwhelming the 
proof of guilt may be. Not to be outdone, grand juries have 
likewise refused to indict, although abundant evidence to war- 
rant such action was submitted to them. It is matter of current 
history that the law relating to the manner of selecting grand 
jurors in this State was recently changed because it was found, 
at least in some localities, that grand jurors selected in the old 
way by aldermen and supervisors would not do their duty. . . 

The witnesses called by the prosecution in actions involving 
political corruption often sympathize more with the defense 
than with the State and their disposition whenever possible to 
suppress evidence, distort facts and suggest defensive matter is 
another obstacle to the successful prosecution of this class of 
cases. At the trial it is not unusual indeed to find the State's 
principal witness in league with the accused and willing to tell 
the truth only so far as he may be compelled to do so under fear 
of prosecution for perjury. 

Erroneous rulings prejudicial to the State made by trial judges 
upon matters of law constitute another serious impediment to 
the successful prosecution of these offenses. In this class of 
cases legal technicalities invariably assume formidable propor- 
tions. The plain, ordinary, unofficial crook who steals in the old- 
fashioned way when no one is looking, and not by securing the 
passage of a resolution through the county board or common 
council or a bill through the State legislature, when charged with 
crime usually comes into court, pleads not guilty to the informa- 
tion, and goes to trial upon the merits in the court where he is 
arraigned. 

Not so with the suspected grafter. He usually begins battle 
with the State by filing an affidavit of prejudice against the pre- 
siding judge. This, of necessity, will compel a change of venue 
to another court, and will occasion delay, sometimes a delay of 
many months. When the case is finally called for trial in the 



280 Readings on Parties and Elections 

court to which it has been sent his usual practice is to file a plea 
in abatement, in which the existence and regularity of almost 
anything under the sun, no matter how remotely connected with 
the indictment, may be challenged. If this plea be ruled against 
him, he will demur. If the demurrer be over-ruled, he will next 
interpose a motion to quash the indictment. If this be denied, 
he will then file a special plea in bar. If beaten upon this issue 
also, he will reluctantly plead to the merits, and if convicted will 
promptly obtain a stay of execution for the purpose of enabling 
him to appeal the case to the supreme court. Thus the trial 
upon the merits may be the smallest part, and often is the least 
interesting proceeding connected with the whole case. 

Needless to say, the attorneys who represent defendants in 
these cases are among the leaders at the bar. No money, no 
effort, no ingenuity will be spared to save the least of these dis- 
tinguished gentlemen from merited punishment ; for, no matter 
how poor or humble or insignificant the individual grafter may 
be, back of him stands the whole body of corruptionists, the 
political boss and the special business interests he represents, 
all of whom have waxed fat by means of the grafter's knavery. 

Every one of these dilatory pleas involves delay, and delay 
usually weakens the State's case. Undoubtedly it is often with 
this object in view that resort is had to them. 

Upon any one of these questions the trial judge, if he be weak 
or partial to the accused, may make a ruling which will then and 
there end the prosecution forever. For, as a rule, the State has 
no right of appeal in criminal cases. If it had this right, as it 
should, weak and vacillating judges would no longer resolve every 
doubt against the State, in order thereby to avoid reversals 
in the supreme court and so keep their records clear. . . 

Moreover, even supreme court judges sometimes become ex- 
tremely partisan. It is interesting now to turn back to the 
opinions written in bribery cases when the present crusade 
against political corruption was only just begun. Passing by 
the Tweed case in New York and the Butler case in St. Louis — 



Party Problems and Remedies 281 

monuments both to the bad law which such partisanship may 
promulgate in order to protect a political favorite or save from 
prison a party boss — let a single instance suffice. In the Mey- 
senburg case (71 S.W., 229) decided five years ago by the su- 
preme court of Missouri the majority opinion savagely attacked 
Mr. Folk. Almost everything he did in the conduct of that case 
in the court below was reviewed and criticised, and the opinion 
then concluded with the following stump speech : 

This record abounds at every turn with errors committed, 
but none of them, however, in favor of defendant. It would fill 
a volume properly to note and comment upon them. It will 
not be attempted. Those already mentioned must be taken as 
indices of the rest. But I will say this for the record at bar — 
that it occupies the bad preeminence of holding a larger number 
of errors than any other record in a criminal case I ever before 
examined, and that, if this record exhibits a sample of a fair 
trial, then let justice hereafter be symbolized by something other 
than the blind goddess with sword and scales. 

Decisions such as these by courts of last resort, based now 
upon partisan bias and again upon technicality and legal hair- 
splitting to the utter disregard of the claims of justice and the 
suggestions of common sense, are specially vicious in their far- 
reaching effect upon trial judges. Intimidated by them, cau- 
tious men upon trial benches too often become dwarfed in func- 
tion and paralyzed in judgment until they are mere "umpires 
at the game of litigation." 

Another obstacle to reform along the lines here proposed is 
hostile public sentiment. All men are opposed to dishonesty in 
the abstract and are willing to applaud an assault upon it under- 
taken in another city, county or State. But it makes a world of 
difference whose ox is gored. . . Reform of ourselves or of 
our city is seldom either pleasant or popular. Besides, to assail 
political corruption, no matter where, is to throw down the 
gauntlet to the most powerful political and financial influences. 
It is only natural that these forces should resist the assault with 
all the power at their command and should even assume the 



282 Readings on Parties and Elections 

offensive and in turn make war upon the agencies of the law en- 
gaged in the task of enforcing its penalties against them. Thus, 
venal newspapers will be enlisted in the contest and an under- 
current of hostile sentiment will be started, which, sooner or later, 
will manifest itself in mis-trials, perverse verdicts, adverse rulings 
by trial judges and indefensible decisions by courts of last resort. 
Notwithstanding all these difficulties, however, political cor- 
ruption may be repressed by legal means. Recent history proves 
this. To doubt that in the future this history will be repeated is 
to doubt the permanency of free institutions and the capacity of 
a free people for self-government. 

6. VIOLENCE AT ELECTIONS l 

Cases of intimidation and violence in elections though 
decreasing in number are still, especially in the crowded dis- 
tricts of our large cities, the accompaniment of every closely 
fought election. 

Thug methods were resorted to at the polling place of the nth 
division of the Tenth Ward, in North Broad street, yesterday. 
As a result J. S. Ridenour and William Acker were beaten into 
unconsciousness and then taken to the Eleventh and Winter 
streets station. Two other William Penn watchers — J. B. and 
George Kelly — were also beaten and arrested. . . f? 

. . . The assault, it is charged, was prearranged. There can 
be no doubt about that, it is declared, for each victim had re- 
ceived warnings that in case of his seeking to interfere with the 
workings of the Organization he would be hurt. The thugs made 
good their threat. After being released after 5 o'clock, Mr. 
Ridenour told the following story : 

"At 7 o'clock all the Penn party watchers were in front of 
the polls, but were refused admittance. The doors were not 
opened to the voters until 13 minutes after 7. A mob had col- 
lected. . . 

1 Public Ledger. (Philadelphia) November 3, 1909. 



Party Problems and Remedies 283 

" Charles McConnell, the Organization division leader, shoved 
us into the line and ordered us to wait until about a dozen 
strangers voted. As soon as we had voted we demanded to see 
the inside of the ballot box. McConnell ordered the lid taken 
off and then grabbed me and thrust me toward the can. I did 
not see the bottom of the can, however, for he jerked me away 
as suddenly as he had thrust me forward. 

" A man giving his name as Andrew Rodgers appeared next 
and we challenged his right to vote. Our objections were sus- 
tained, but, the most remarkable scene ensued. Another man, 
Charles Hall, desired to vote, and we also challenged him. 
Rodgers, against whom our objections were sustained, was then 
permitted to vouch for Hall, and the word of Rodgers was taken 
as sufficient reason why Hall's vote should be accepted." 

Watchers Beaten Unconscious 

" We challenged several others and were told to keep quiet. 
Finally one Thomas Campbell, who was registered from the rear 
of 13 10 Cherry street, where there is no house, by the way, asked 
to vote. George Kelly challenged him. Campbell then cursed 
Kelly and ran toward him. Before Kelly was aware of Camp- 
bell's intentions he was struck in the face and Kelly fell back 
against the wall. With an oath, Campbell kicked at Kelly and 
was about to strike him again. I seized Campbell's arm and 
appealed to John McCluskey, the judge of the election, for aid. 
McCluskey and the entire board left their places and the room 
filled with men as if by magic. Then I was struck with a black- 
jack. The blow came from the rear and I fell. I remember noth- 
ing more until I found myself huddled in a corner with Acker 
stretched across the doorway. I attempted to rise, but was 
kicked. After several attempts to gain my feet I grasped the 
leg of the table and pulled myself to my knees. I was then 
thrown across the still unconscious Acker and thrust outside." 

Injured Men Arrested 

Then ensued one of the most remarkable bits of police politics 
that has ever been seen here. Kelly, a policeman of the Elev- 
enth and Winter streets station, pulled Ridenour and Acker to 
their feet and, in pursuance of the demands of the Organization 
workers, announced that they were under arrest. Ridenour 



284 Readings on Parties and Elections 

fainted from loss of blood. A well directed blow had ripped his 
scalp behind the ear and the bridge of his nose was crushed. In 
all justice to the policeman it must be said, so the victims have 
heard, that he was evidently acting under instructions. He 
helped the two men to their feet and half dragged them to the 
Hahnemann Hospital. There four stitches were put in Ride- 
nour's scalp and his nose was set and bandaged. Acker's in- 
juries were not so painful. Only three stitches were required 
to close his wound. 

Ridenour and Acker asked the policemen to be allowed 
to telephone to their employers. They were refused this 
privilege and thrust into a patrol wagon. At the station house 
they were told that Director Clay had issued orders that no 
messages should be sent out from the station. 

Ridenour's friends made an immediate attempt to find him. 
At the Eleventh and Winter streets station a reporter . . . was 
dismissed with a snarling denial that either Ridenour or Acker 
was there. At the City Hall all inquiries were met with a pro- 
fession of ignorance. 

Another attempt to make the police of the Eleventh and Win- 
ter streets station tell where their prisoners were met with a curt 
refusal and a denial that the arrested watchers were within the 
cell room. Shortly after 4 o'clock Acker was released, and, of 
course, the whereabouts of Ridenour and the Kellys was then 
made known. 

Confronted with this information, the police admitted that 
Ridenour was in the house, but refused to allow any one to see 
him. Commissioner Frank Gorman, secretary of the William 
Penn party's City Committee, was appealed to on behalf of 
Ridenour, and was told by the police that the beaten watcher had 
been released with Acker. This, however, was untrue, for Ride- 
nour was not released until 5 o'clock. At the police station 
those in charge told the reporters that the affair was not of their 
doing, but that they had acted under strict orders from the City 
Hall. 



Party Problems and Remedies 285 

Mr. Gorman declared that almost all attempts of his to secure 
the signature of a Magistrate to a copy of the charge against the 
various incarcerated men had been fruitless, and that where he 
had got the signatures they were not honored by the police. 

Other Watchers Locked Up 

In the station house with Ridenour, Acker and the Kellys were 
four other William Penn watchers from various divisions of the 
10th ward. One of these was William Smith, a former police- 
man of the station in which he was a prisoner, and a William 
Penn watcher from the third division of the 10th Ward. 

Smith said that policemen escorted voters in carriages to his 
division, and his arrest was the result of his protests. An at- 
tempt was made to assault him, Smith declared, and, as a result, 
the voting room was wrecked. The booths were partly wrenched 
apart to be used as clubs. Smith said he was dragged to the 
station house by several of his former associates. . . 

. . . Activity of policemen and other office-holders at many 
of the 1 1 74 election divisions in the city was evident from the 
opening of the polls until their closing at 7 o'clock, and accord- 
ing to charges made at the Penn party headquarters, no attempt 
was made by the police in many instances to interfere with at- 
tacks on Penn party workers by ruffians. . . 



vote l 

Laws intended to help the illiterate or crippled voter to 
take his part in the elections often form in the hands of corrupt 
party managers only a blind by which the secrecy of the ballot 
of those willing to sell their votes may be destroyed. 



I shall now describe . . . the working of Mr. Addicks 
political 'machine,' and the methods by which he buys votes. . 

1 Kennan, G., Outlook. February 22, 1903 ; p. 432 et seq. 



286 Readings on Parties and Elections 

The most valuable and useful cog in Mr. Addicks' machine is, 
unquestionably, the voter's assistant. When the State of Dela- 
ware adopted the Australian ballot system, it was thought neces- 
sary to provide the illiterate voter — and especially the negro — 
with expert assistance in the marking of his ballot. The Gov- 
ernor was therefore empowered and directed to appoint, for 
every polling-place, two voter's assistants — one from each of 
the two dominant parties — whose duty it should be to read or 
explain the ballot to the voter and assist him in marking it. It 
was not long before these voter's assistants became — as Mr. 
Willard Saulsbury said in his letter to Governor Hunn — mere 
i tally clerks to see that purchased voters delivered the goods.' 
As the Union Republican party, in recent elections, has been one 
of the two principal parties, it has had its own voter's assistants, 
and has used them to keep watch and tally of its purchased vote. 
If Mr. Addicks had not been able, by means of these officers, to 
check up his expenditures and make sure that he received the 
votes for which he had paid, he would not now have twenty-one 
Senators and Representatives voting for him in the Legislature 
of the State. Voters might have taken his money just as freely, 
but many of them would not have 'delivered the goods.' 

In practice, the voter's assistant part of Mr. Addicks' machine 
consists of a secret booth, a corrupt voter's assistant, a cashier's 
office, and a cashier. The workers make ' deals ' with purchasable 
voters before election day, and then furnish the cashiers with 
lists of men bought and amounts of money promised. When 
the purchased voter goes to the polls, the corrupt voter's as- 
sistant sees that his ballot is properly marked and deposited, and 
then gives him something in the nature of a token, as a proof 
that the goods have been delivered. The voter thereupon goes 
to the cashier's office, surrenders the token, and receives the 
amount of money set opposite his name on the worker's list, 
which has previously been turned over to the cashier for the 
latter's guidance. 

At one polling-place in the Baltimore hundred, in the early 



Party Problems and Remedies 287 

days, the token given to the purchased voter was a chestnut, 
which the assistant put into the voter's pocket. It soon became 
noised about among the colored men of the village that ordinary 
chestnuts at the cashier's office were bringing $10 apiece. Two or 
three negroes provided themselves with chestnuts from private 
sources of supply, and went boldly into the cashier's office to 
get money for which they had rendered no service. To their 
great surprise and disappointment, they were promptly hustled 
out, minus chestnuts and without any money. All chestnuts 
looked alike to them, and they could not understand what was 
wrong with their chestnuts, until they learned a few days later 
that all the chestnuts of the voter's assistant had been carefully 
and thoroughly boiled, for easy identification and as a pre- 
caution against this very trick. 

The Addicks managers now provide their voter's assistants 
with tokens that have been bought outside of the State and that 
cannot be easily duplicated or counterfeited. In Dagsboro, in 
last fall's election, they used a red celluloid button of a peculiar 
form which could not be obtained in Delaware. In the Balti- 
more hundred they had tin tags stamped 'O.K.' Tin tags 
were also used in Milford, Kent County. In other representative 
districts purchased voters were given a certain number of links 
of a small, fine chain, or peculiar large-headed black pins, which 
they stuck in their coats when they went to the cashier's office 
for settlement. 

The system was ingenious and worked well ; but in some parts 
of the State, where the voter's assistants could be fully relied 
upon, money was given directly to them, and they paid for votes 
in their booths. This was safer than making settlements out- 
side and involved less trouble. . . 

When Mr. Addicks' agents first began to buy votes in southern 
Delaware, they could 'get' only a part of the negroes, and a few 
men from the poorest class of whites ; but the corrupting influ- 
ence of money, used boldly and with impunity throughout a long 
series of years, finally had its effect upon men of a higher type — 



288 Readings on Parties and Elections 

men who could not plead poverty as an excuse for their acts. 
Well-to-do farmers in Sussex County, who own their farms and 
have money in bank, now sell their votes regularly every other 
year ; and as for the colored population, which polls in the two 
lower counties a vote of about five thousand, it has been cor- 
rupted en masse. Many informants in Kent and Sussex told 
me that in the circle of their personal acquaintance they did not 
know a single negro who 'voted his sentiments.' Every man 
of them sold his vote for what it would bring. 

8. REPEATING 1 

In large cities it is impossible for the election officials to 
know all the voters. This makes it possible for corrupt party 
workers to get the names of men not qualified to vote on the 
registry books not only in one but in various precincts. Such 
votes once cast are as valid as any. The effect on the result of 
course is the same as if the ballot box had been stuffed by the 
election officials. 

For thirty- two years preceding the election of 1908, the num- 
ber of persons registering in the boroughs of Manhattan and the 
Bronx increased every four years on an average 29,714. In 1908, 
on the other hand, the registered vote in the same territory de- 
creased 19,952, which, if added to the normal increase during the 
preceding thirty-two years, represented a total falling off of 
49,666 in the boroughs of Manhattan and the Bronx alone. It 
is also more worthy of note that far greater efforts were made to 
check this vote in this same territory than in the rest of the city. 
Despite this falling off of the registration in the elections of 1908, 
yet in this very same election a leader of an assembly district 
has stated that in his district alone he found 900 fraudulent regis- 
trations, and even then he believed that there were many that 
he had not discovered. This leader, moreover, is known as one 

1 Finch, E. R., " The Fight for a Clean Ballot." Independent. May 12, 
1910. 



Party Problems and Remedies 289 

who is over-diligent in seeking to prevent these frauds. A care- 
ful investigation in widely different parts of the city following 
the election of 1908 showed that, even with all the fraudulent 
votes that had been eliminated, yet in many districts this vote 
ran from one-eighth to one-quarter of the total registered vote. 
The above statements are not those made by a writer solely for 
the sake of exciting attention, but are capable of demonstration 
and actual proof. 

It has been publicly stated that following the election had 
last November, those in a position to know have admitted that, 
owing to the precautions which were taken to prevent these 
frauds, 20,000 a tin soldiers," as they call the repeaters, had been 
prevented from registering and voting. This is the admitted 
statement of those who produce this vote. A conservative es- 
timate places the number of fraudulent registrations and votes 
prevented as upward of 30,000. When it is noticed that a 
Sheriff, District Attorney, a President of the Borough of Man- 
hattan and three Supreme Court Judges were elected by con- 
siderably less than 30,000, thoughtful men pause and wonder 
how often in the past has the true verdict of the people been over- 
ridden. 

New York City, because of its size and because the election 
officers do not expect to know their neighbors, furnishes the 
Mecca for those who make it their business to produce this vote. 
For many years now in this city personal registration has been 
required. Those who wish to vote must present themselves at 
the polling-place on one of four specified days within thirty days 
preceding election day, and there personally state to the board 
of inspectors their qualifications. This is done by answering 
and signing the following questions : Name and address, age, 
number of floor residing on, person residing with, whether na- 
tive born or a naturalized citizen, and if naturalized, in what 
court, length of time residing in the State, in the county and in 
the election district, from where last registered and voted. 

For the purpose of affording convenient access to the polling- 



290 Readings on Parties and Elections 

places, the city is divided into election districts upon a basis of 
having 500 registered voters in each district. When the person 
applying to register presents himself this information is taken 
down by four separate inspectors, each of whom makes a sepa- 
rate record of the answers of the voter. Two of these inspectors 
represent the party casting the highest number of votes for Gov- 
ernor in the last preceding election, and two of them represent 
the party casting the next highest number of votes cast for Gov- 
ernor, and thus they represent at the present time the Republi- 
can party and the Democratic party respectively. 

On election day the voter presents himself again at the same 
polling-place and gives his name and address and signs his name 
and deposits the ballot that is given him in the ballot box. Now, 
if the board of inspectors knew their neighbors, as would be 
the case if the community was a small one, then fraudulent regis- 
tration would be almost an impossibility. The board of in- 
spectors would expect to know those applying to register, or at 
least to know their identity. The risk a repeater would run 
would be too great. In the City of New York none of the in- 
spectors composing the board expect to know the person apply- 
ing to register. It is an exception if they do know him. 
Probably out of 500 people that apply for registration, they 
may know fifty of them. 

This is the great fact upon which the producer of the fraudu- 
lent vote relies. In each election district one person, aided by 
assistants, is responsible for the false registrations to be pro- 
duced in that district. The object is to put on the rolls as many 
false registrations as possible. Of course, in many districts of 
the city it is impossible to produce much of this vote, but in 
other districts the conditions are such that the deficiency can be 
made up. 

Now, let us see how easy it is to do this. A man comes in 
to the registration board and gives his name as Thomas Robin- 
son, his address as a large boarding house or says he lives with 
Mrs. X., on the sixth floor of a ten-story apartment house having 



Party Problems and Remedies 291 

four families on a floor ; that he has been living there for two 
weeks ; is thirty-two years of age ; has been in the State three 
years and in the county six months ; is a native-born citizen and 
has not registered and voted before in this State, and signs his 
name. 

The board of inspectors do not know that these facts about 
him are not true and there is no one else to challenge him. The 
producer of this vote has seen Mrs. X. long before. . . If, as 
very rarely happens, inquiry is made between registration and 
election days, Mrs. X. is prepared to say that Thomas Robin- 
son is not at home, but that he lives there. 

Thomas Robinson, after registering in this polling place, has 
walked up the street and had himself introduced to the producer 
of the fraudulent vote in the next election district and has had 
furnished him another Mrs. X., and here he has registered under 
the name of William Jones and given the second Mrs. X.'s ad- 
dress. Very often, and despite all the vigilance used during the 
last election, it has even happened that Thomas Robinson has 
gone before the same board of registration officers and given an- 
other name and another address in the same election district, 
and put another name on the same roll. A person who is genu- 
inely interested in preventing these frauds can see them perpetu- 
ated by visiting any one of a number of different registration 
places. 

Now, on election day, a repeater often other than the repeater 
who placed the name on the roll, comes to each of these polling 
places, gives the name and the address that was registered, signs 
his name, takes the ballot, marks it and deposits it. When once 
in the box it is just as valid as the ballot deposited by any honest 
American who has waited for one-third of his life before he was 
entitled to deposit his ballot in the ballot box. . . 

Let us see how the producer distributed the false registra- 
tions in the block composing his district. 

His wife and he occupied the first floor above the basement 
of a three-story house made over to accommodate a family on 



292 Readings on Parties and Elections 

each floor. Eight names were to be registered as living with 
them, and his wife knew her role. He had been able to provide 
some odd jobs for the man who rented the floor above, and in 
return this man and his wife were to stand cover for seven. The 
woman who rented the top floor was to pretend that five lived 
with her, in consideration of the payment of her rent for a month. 
The barber in the basement, favoring a steady customer, was 
willing to put a screen in the rear to cover a double cot and make 
pretense for two more. He had gone to every one who had taken 
names the year before and had urged the necessity of the great- 
est possible increase. In addition, he had canvassed the janitor 
and the lessee of every apartment house and the proprietor of 
every house with rooms to let. Wherever there was a vacant 
apartment he had endeavored, and in most cases with success, 
to persuade the janitor to say it was occupied by the persons 
whose names he furnished. The persons living in his district 
whom he knew he approached directly, and others he approached 
thru mutual friends. Those who were willing he paid either 
with a cash consideration or a future reward. 

A doctor, who was hoping to be appointed as a Coroner's 
physician, occupied a house with his father and brother, and was 
willing to take four additional names. The inmates of a dis- 
orderly house had been sent away and twenty-seven cots had 
been sent in, and the house had a sign as renting rooms to men 
only. A stable in the block had furnished cover for eleven more. 
If any questions were asked of these men, their only answer was 
to be that they worked and slept in the stable. He himself was 
employed in a city department, and consequently only put in 
an appearance for a few minutes, once in the morning and once 
in the afternoon. Every one in the department understood that 
it was the month before election. He had kept in mind all the 
year around the real work that he was assigned to do. When- 
ever any favor was done for any householder or lessee, there was 
always the idea that this person might be obtained as a cover for 
additional false votes. 



Party Problems and Remedies 293 

His efforts had almost brought the number up to 150, and he 
was counting on taking the chances of having a few register from 
residences whose owners would not be likely to scan the registra- 
tion list, or if they did, would be too fearful of notoriety and in- 
convenience to make any complaint. Following the usual cus- 
tom, he had arranged for the use of a vacant basement next door 
to the polling place. Here he had a helper in charge who had a 
list of the places from which the names were to be registered. 
Thruout the four days of registration he would be visited from 
time to time by a man whom he would know and who would 
introduce to him two or three men at a time, and these men would 
be sent into the basement, and there given the name and address 
and information under which they were to go up and register 
in the polling-place. As soon as they had registered they would 
come back to the basement and would be furnished with a slip 
upon which they would write the name and address under which 
they had just registered, and the name of the person with whom 
they had stated they lived. On the same slip they would also 
sign the name just the same as they signed it in the polling place. 
Having made this slip out and turned it in, they would receive 
$1 apiece for registering, and go off with their leader to another 
polling place to meet the man who was there in charge of the 
same work. 

The object of having the information put on a slip and the 
name signed as the repeater had signed it on the registration 
book was to have this slip ready to turn over to the man who 
would vote under this name on election day. 

The man who acted as introducer is known as the "guerrilla" 
leader. On election day the same "guerrilla" leader and other 
"guerrilla" leaders would bring around the same or other men, 
only more men would be brought at one time and they would be 
brought faster, because, while there are four days to register 
the names, yet all the names registered must be voted on elec- 
tion day. It is the custom to get a start early in the morning, 
and so, after the polls have been open for a few minutes, there is 



294 Readings on Parties and Elections 

usually a line of from seventy-five to one hundred men waiting 
to vote. In addition to the men brought by the "guerrilla" 
leaders, the producer of the vote in the particular election dis- 
trict usually knows a few local men whom he can utilize. Last 
year, it was said, two men, partners in business, who had re- 
ceived contracts under the city government, and who had an 
acquaintance with the producers of this vote in certain sec- 
tions of the city, were informed that they would have to act 
as " guerrilla" leaders. They demurred, but were told that if 
they expected any favors to come, they would have to so act. 

When considered in the abstract, it looks as if the fraud is 
bold, but when the concrete case is presented, as shown above, it 
is seen that the chance of detection is not formidable. The 
" guerrilla " leaders prefer to have men from out of the State, 
because at the close of the day these men can leave the State and 
their identity is lost. 

The devices used to give color for false residences are innumer- 
able. Old names are sought to be kept on the rolls, because it 
follows that the older they are, the more certain the investigator 
feels that they must be legitimate. Similarly, the names of 
dead men are oftentimes kept on the rolls. In the election of 
1908 a name was registered which was that of a son whose mother 
said that he had died in 1904. This illustrates the humor in 
the remark of a Philadelphian "that they were still voting in 
that city the names of the signers of the Declaration of Inde- 
pendence." 

The names of those who have moved between one election and 
another furnishes a fruitful source. From 30 per cent, to 45 
per cent, of the voters in an election district move between each 
election. The remaining 70 per cent, to 55 per cent, represent 
the permanent roll. These men should be checked up during 
the period immediately following one election and in preparation 
for the next. But it has often been customary to make little, if 
any, investigation prior to the next registration, which must all 
take place in the thirty days immediately preceding. Then an 



Party Problems and Remedies 295 

effort is made to check up the total registration in the city of 
New York, which numbers upward of 650,000 voters. It is im- 
possible in this short time to make any adequate investigation, 
and consequently, the few cases that are investigated are often 
done in a haphazard fashion, and such investigation must of 
necessity only concern a small portion of the names fraudulently 
registered. . . 

As greater efforts have been made for a clean ballot, so greater 
counter-efforts and more ingenious devices have been used on 
the part of those producing this fraudulent vote. In the last 
election transfers of fraudulent names were had between different 
election districts and between different assembly districts, so 
as to baffle the investigator in verifying registration. Again, 
squads of men have been hired in adjacent cities and brought 
to the city of New York for the purpose of having them sleep a 
few nights in one district and a few nights in another district 
and so on, and have them register in each of such districts. One 
man from out of town showed four different keys of the four 
places where he was to sleep a few nights. Again, names were 
put on the rolls of foreigners actually living in the district. 
When inquiry was made at the houses it was ascertained that 
persons corresponding to the names registered were living in 
these houses, and thus the investigator felt satisfied, not think- 
ing to ask whether these persons were naturalized. Another 
plan was to have unnaturalized aliens simply register on the 
statement that they were native born ; when asked where, they 
gave some other state in the union. Statistics have been so 
loosely kept that it is impossible to disprove this statement, even 
if time were available between registration and election. After 
election, the matter is dropped. A thoughtful person who learns 
for the first time that all a foreign-born citizen who desires to 
vote as a native born has to do is to make a statement on regis- 
tration day that he is a native-born citizen, is amazed at the 
effectiveness of the answer. Those seeking to eradicate these 
frauds are never sure that they have discovered all. Experi- 



296 Readings on Parties and Elections 

ence has taught that often names which appear to represent 
genuine voters are nothing but a trick more clever than any be- 
fore discovered. 

In the event that an effort is made to arrest and convict per- 
sons falsely registering, no expense or plan is too great for the 
producers of these votes to undertake in an endeavor to prevent 
a conviction. It is the psychology of this dastardly business 
to guarantee protection to those who take the chances. Low 
bail in the first instance is always sought, and if the chances for 
conviction look good, the bail is forfeited. Another favorite 
method is to have the men escape by the inability of the in- 
spectors to identify the man as the person who actually at- 
tempted to register. If a conviction is secured, a persistent, 
determined effort is made to obtain a pardon, particularly before 
the next election, so that the producers of the vote may point to 
the pardon as their guarantee of protection before asking that 
the same chances be taken in the next election. The number of 
pardons of the producers of this vote is astonishing, and the 
number of those who actually escape conviction on what seems 
to the citizen wholly technical defenses is more astonishing. 

9. THE EFFECT OF VOTE BUYING ON THE VOTERS * 

The effect of vote buying is not confined to the election 
returns and the dishonest party manager and his " friends." 
Citizens of unquestioned integrity too often feel that if money 
is being paid for voting it is a shame to let the rascals get it all. 
Many a voter sees no wrong in accepting a payment of " car- 
fare" or one to cover "time lost in voting." 

Before we can find remedies for the corruption of the ballot 
it will be necessary to look somewhat carefully into the causes 
of the corruption. It is not sufficient to say that the corruption 
is due to the party spirit of the time, or to our form of ballot, 

1 Jenks, J. W., " Money in Practical Politics. " Century, Vol. 44, 1892 ; 
p. 947. 



Party Problems and Remedies 297 

or to any other one or more of such external causes ; the causes 
lie deeper than that. In the first place, so long as we have, 
practically, universal suffrage, we shall always find many voters 
who are ready to cast their votes not from principle, but for 
their own pecuniary interest, though this number is smaller than 
many think. A large part of the "commercials" are paid to 
vote as they would vote without bribery. Not till the mil- 
lenium comes can we expect these most selfish voters to refuse to 
sell their votes, if the opportunity offers. We must in some way 
make it for the interests of the party managers not to attempt 
to buy. But, on the other hand, whenever an election is close, 
and "floaters" stand about, waiting for bids, the temptation is 
so great for party managers to buy, in order to secure the elec- 
tion of their candidates, that we need not expect the practice to 
stop, unless in some way, as said above, we can make the advan- 
tage to be gained from honesty greater than that to be gained 
from dishonesty. At the present time, under our present laws, 
the prize is so great and the risk so slight, that corruption is 
sure to be found in almost every close district. 

At the present time, many a man who will not sell his vote to 
the opposite party will nevertheless ask pay for his time on elec- 
tion day. From this receipt of his expenses in bringing himself 
and his workmen to the polls, bribery is made easy. The man 
feels that he is not selling his vote; he was expecting to vote 
his party ticket at any rate. But after he has gone thus far a 
number of times he loses sight of the real purpose for which he 
is voting, and the ballot seems to be cast for the good, not of 
the country, but of the candidate. If the candidate is to be 
benefited, why should he not pay for the benefit ? He can afford 
it. Not a few men, seeing money going freely into the pockets 
of "floaters," say to the managers: "If money is so plentiful, 
why should the scoundrels get it all ? Let us honest partymen 
have our share. Our votes are worth just as much to the candi- 
dates." 

In classes of university students, containing from ten to twenty 



298 Readings on Parties and Elections 

voters, more than once I have found several — from five to ten 
— who had received from campaign managers their expenses 
home from college to cast their votes. These students were by- 
no means common " floaters" ; their votes could not be directly 
purchased at all. But still, on first consideration, many of them 
defend the payment of expenses of voters by their own party, 
when they are unable to pay them themselves, not realizing that 
this is but a covert form of bribery, and that, after receiving 
expenses, one would not feel at liberty to vote independently. 
If people as intelligent and honest as are college students of vot- 
ing age will thus thoughtlessly encourage corrupt methods of 
voting, what may we expect from the " floater"? 

Another cause that has conduced to the corruption of voters 
is the lack of distinct issues between the parties. When party 
feeling is very strong, as in our country at the time of the Civil 
War, when most of the masses feel that upon the success of their 
party depends the existence of their country, votes will not be so 
readily sold; relatively speaking, only here and there will be 
found a man whose vote is purchasable. But when the issues 
between the parties are not sharply drawn, when a man feels 
that either party's success is of slight consequence, it is much 
easier to secure his vote by purchase without any consciousness 
on his part of corruption. 

IO. THE POWER OF THE UNITED STATES TO REGULATE ELEC- 
TIONS TO THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES l 

Though the regulation of voting is primarily left to the 
states the Federal Government exercises an important degree of 
control through its ability to insure the purity of Congressional 
elections. 

Mr. Justice Bradley delivered the opinion of the court. 
The petitioners in this case were judges of election at dif- 
ferent voting precincts in the city of Baltimore, at the election 

x Ex parte Siebold, 100 U. S. 371, 1879 (excerpt). 



Party Problems and Remedies 299 

held in that city and in the State of Maryland, on the fifth day 
of November, 1878, at which representatives to the Forty-sixth 
Congress were voted for. 

At the November Term of the Circuit Court of the United 
States for the District of Maryland, an indictment against each 
of the petitioners was found in said court, for offences alleged to 
have been committed by them respectively at their respective 
precincts whilst being such judges of election; upon which in- 
dictments they were severally tried, convicted, and sentenced 
by said court to fine and imprisonment. They now apply to 
this court for a writ of habeas corpus to be relieved from im- 
prisonment. 

These indictments were framed partly under sect. 5515 and 
partly under sect. 5522 of the Revised Statutes of the United 
States; and the principal questions raised by the application 
are, whether those sections, and certain sections of the title of 
the Revised Statutes relating to the elective franchise, which 
they are intended to enforce, are within the constitutional power 
of Congress to enact. . . 

Congress has partially regulated the subject heretofore. In 
1842, it passed a law for the election of representatives by separ- 
ate districts; and, subsequently, other laws fixing the time of 
election, and directing that the elections shall be by ballot. No 
one will pretend, at least at the present day, that these laws were 
unconstitutional because they only partially covered the sub- 
ject. . . 

The State may make regulations on the subject; Congress 
may make regulations on the same subject, or may alter or add 
to those already made. The paramount character of those made 
by Congress has the effect to supersede those made by the State, 
so far as the two are inconsistent, and no farther. There is no 
such conflict between them as to prevent their forming a har- 
monious system perfectly capable of being administered and 
carried out as such. . . 



300 Readings on Parties and Elections 

As to the supposed incompatibility of independent sanctions 
and punishments imposed by the two governments, for the en- 
forcement of the duties required of the officers of election, and 
for their protection in the performance of those duties, the same 
considerations apply. While the State will retain the power of 
enforcing such of its own regulations as are not superseded by 
those adopted by Congress, it cannot be disputed that if Con- 
gress has power to make regulations it must have the power to 
enforce them, not only by punishing the delinquency of officers 
appointed by the United States, but by restraining and punish- 
ing those who attempt to interfere with them in the performance 
of their duties ; and if, as we have shown, Congress may revise 
existing regulations, and add to or alter the same as far as it 
deems expedient, there can be as little question that it may im- 
pose additional penalties for the prevention of frauds committed 
by the State officers in the elections, or for their violation of any 
duty relating thereto, whether arising from the common law or 
from any other law, State or National. Why not? Penalties 
for fraud and delinquency are part of the regulations belonging 
to the subject. If Congress, by its power to make or alter the 
regulations, has a general supervisory power over the whole sub- 
ject, what is there to preclude it from imposing additional sanc- 
tions and penalties to prevent such fraud and delinquency ? 

It is objected that Congress has no power to enforce State 
laws or to punish State officers, and especially has no power to 
punish them for violating the laws of their own State. As a 
general proposition, this is undoubtedly true ; but when, in the 
performance of their functions, State officers are called upon to 
fulfil duties which they owe to the United States as well as to 
the State, has the former no means of compelling such fulfilment ? 
Yet that is the case here. It is the duty of the States to elect 
representatives to Congress. The due and fair election of these 
representatives is of vital importance to the United States. The 
government of the United States is no less concerned in the trans- 
action than the State government is. It certainly is not bound 



Party Problems and Remedies 301 

to stand by as a passive spectator, when duties are violated and 
outrageous frauds are committed. It is directly interested in 
the faithful performance, by the officers of election, of their re- 
spective duties. Those duties are owed as well to the United 
States as to the State. This necessarily follows from the mixed 
character of the transaction, — State and National. A viola- 
tion of duty is an offense against the United States, for which 
the offender is justly amenable to that government. No official 
position can shelter him from this responsibility. In view of 
the fact that Congress has plenary and paramount jurisdiction 
over the whole subject, it seems almost absurd to say that an 
officer who receives or has custody of the ballots given for a repre- 
sentative owes no duty to the national government which Con- 
gress can enforce; or that an officer who stuffs the ballot-box 
cannot be made amenable to the United States. If Congress 
has not, prior to the passage of the present laws, imposed any 
penalties to prevent and punish frauds and violations of duty 
committed by officers of election, it has been because the exi- 
gency has not been deemed sufficient to require it, and not be- 
cause Congress had not the requisite power. . . 

The counsel for the petitioners concede that Congress may, 
if it sees fit, assume the entire control and regulation of the elec- 
tion of representatives. This would necessarily involve the ap- 
pointment of the places for holding the polls, the times of voting, 
and the officers for holding the election; it would require the 
regulation of the duties to be performed, the custody of the bal- 
lots, the mode of ascertaining the result, and every other matter 
relating to the subject. Is it possible that Congress could not, 
in that case, provide for keeping the peace at such elections, and 
for arresting and punishing those guilty of breaking it ? If it could 
not, its power would be but a shadow and a name. But, if Con- 
gress can do this, where is the difference in principle in its making 
provision for securing the preservation of the peace, so as to give 
to every citizen his free right to vote without molestation or in- 
jury, when it assumes only to supervise the regulations made by 



302 Readings on Parties and Elections 

the State, and not to supersede them entirely? In our judg- 
ment, there is no difference ; and, if the power exists in the one 
case it exists in the other. 1 



II. PUBLICITY OF CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS 2 

The last twenty years have seen the development of a cam- 
paign to force the letting in of light upon the methods and re- 
sources of our party organizations. The legislation secured for 
this purpose constantly increases in definiteness. Even parti- 
sanship if forced to fight in the open must confine itself, for its 
support to sources of income which the public conscience will 
approve. 

New York led in the movement for publicity proper with a 
law passed in 1890 (ch. 94), requiring candidates to file state- 
ments for their expenditures. This act was very ineffective, no 
publicity being required for the expenses of election committees. 
Most of the laws subsequently passed have brought campaign 
committees as well as candidates specifically under regulation. 
By the end of 1908, more than twenty states altogether had 
taken some action looking toward the publicity of expenditures. 
The earlier laws of this character were very loosely drawn. In 
many cases they simply required "statements," and the results 
obtained were distinguished chiefly by gross inadequacy and 
heterogeneity. Later statutes and amendments, however, have 
fixed the form of reports, precisely, itemizing them in consider- 
able detail. Wisconsin, for example, furnishes blanks especially 
prepared for this purpose. Vouchers for all sums exceeding five 
or ten dollars are required in a number of states. Publicity of 
receipts is not so commonly prescribed as publicity of expendi- 
tures. Reports of contributions were first required by Colorado 
and Michigan in 1891, followed by Massachusetts in 1892, Cali- 

1 See also ex parte Yarbrough, no U.S. 651, 1884. 

2 Brooks, R. C, Corruption in American Politics and Life. Dodd, Mead 
and Co., New York, 1910; pp. 229-237. 



Party Problems and Remedies 303 

fornia in 1894, Arizona in 1895, and Ohio in 1896. Repeals of 
the laws first passed in Ohio and Michigan indicate that they 
were somewhat ahead of public sentiment at the time, although 
they would hardly be so regarded now. In this connection the 
New York law of 1906 (ch. 502), was an event of first class im- 
portance. It compels political committees to file detailed state- 
ments of receipts as well as expenditures, and provides for judi- 
cial investigation to enforce correct statements. The great 
weight of the name of the Empire State is thus placed squarely 
behind the demand for real publicity of receipts. Under this 
act, voluntarily accepted by the national chairmen in 1908, pub- 
licity was given to the finances of a presidential campaign for 
the first time in the history of the country. 

In the national field the nearest approach to legislation pre- 
scribing publicity for campaign contributions was made by a 
bill (H.R., 201 1 2) introduced into the House of Representatives 
in 1908. * Briefly this bill covered both expenditures and con- 
tributions of the national and the congressional campaign com- 
mittees of all parties, and of "all committees, associations, or 
organizations which shall in two or more states influence the re- 
sult or attempt to influence the result of an election at which 
Representatives in Congress are to be elected." Treasurers of 
such committees were required to file itemized detailed statements 
with the Clerk of the House of Representatives "not more than 
fifteen days and not less than ten days before an election", and also 
final reports within thirty days after such elections. These state- 
ments were to include the names and addresses of contributors 
of $100 or more, the total of contributions under $100, disburse- 
ments exceeding $10 in detail, and the total of disbursements of 
less amount. The bill also contained provisions, which will be 
referred to later, designed to cover the use of money by persons 
or associations other than those mentioned above. Unfortu- 

1 A step in advance has now been made in the act for publicity of 
campaign contributions passed by Congress in 1911. (Public, No. 32. 
Approved August 19, 1911.) 



304 Readings on Parties and Elections 

nately a provision was tacked on to the foregoing raising the ques- 
tion of the restriction of colored voting in the South and hinting 
at a reappointment of congressional representation under the 
Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution. As a consequence 
an embittered opposition was made by the Democrats who 
charged that the latter provision was deliberately introduced in 
bad faith with the intention of making the passage of the bill 
impossible. In the house it was carried by a solid Republican 
vote of 161 in its favour to 126 Democratic votes in opposition, 
but was allowed to expire in the Senate Committee on Privileges 
and Elections for fear that it would become the object of a Demo- 
cratic filibuster. 

Whatever may be the merits of the proposal to readjust con- 
gressional representation it is clearly a question which is logi- 
cally separable from that of campaign contributions. If 
this separation is effected there would seem to be reason to hope 
that a publicity bill similar in its main outlines to that of 1908 
can pass Congress. While a platform plank of this sort was 
voted down in the Republican National Convention of that year, 
Mr. Taft in his speech of acceptance said : 

If I am elected President I shall urge upon Congress, with 
every hope of success, that a law be passed requiring a filing in 
a Federal office of a statement of the contributions received by 
committees and candidates in elections for members of Congress, 
and in such other elections as are constitutionally within the 
control of Congress. 

The manoeuvring for position between the parties in 1908 which 
resulted in the voluntary acceptance by each of high standards 
of publicity is too fresh in the public mind to require rehearsal 
here. For the first time in the history of presidential elections 
some definite information was made available regarding cam- 
paign finances. The Republican National Committee reported 
contributions of $1,035,368.27. This sum, however, does not 
include $620,150 collected in the several states by the finance 
committees of the Republican National Committee and turned 



Party Problems and Remedies 305 

over by them to their respective state committees. The Demo- 
cratic National Committee reported contributions amounting 
to $620,644.77. The list of contributors to the Republican Na- 
tional Fund contained 12,330 names. The Democratic National 
Committee filed a "list of over 250,000 names representing over 
100,000 contributors who contributed through newspapers, 
clubs, solicitors, and other organizations, whose names are on 
file in the office of the chairman of the Democratic National 
Committee at Buffalo." 

On many points, unfortunately, the two reports, while defi- 
nite to a degree hitherto unknown, are not strictly comparable. 
Some species of "uniform accounting" applicable to this subject 
is manifestly necessary before any detailed investigation can be 
undertaken. One big fact stands out with sufficient clearness, 
however, namely that the national campaign of 1908 was waged 
at a money cost far below that of the three preceding cam- 
paigns. 

Basing his estimate upon what is said to have been spent in 
1896, 1900, and 1904, Mr. F. A. Ogg placed the total cost of a 
presidential election to both parties, including the state and local 
contests occurring at the same time, at $15,000,000. One-third 
to one-half of this enormous sum, in his opinion, must be at- 
tributed to the presidential campaign proper. Compared with 
this estimate of from five to seven and a half millions the rela- 
tively modest total of something more than two and a quarter 
millions shown by the figures of 1908 must be counted a strong 
argument in favour of publicity. 

The most important single issue raised by the policies of the 
two parties during the last presidential campaign was that of 
publicity before or after election. Early in the campaign the 
Democratic National Committee decided to publish on or before 
October 15th all individual contributions in excess of $100; 
contributions received subsequent to that date to be published 
on the day of their receipt. Following the principle of the New 
York law both parties made post-election statements. It is 



306 Readings on Parties and Elections 

manifest that complete statements of expenditures, or for that 
matter of contributions as well, can be made only after election. 
Every thorough provision for publicity must, therefore, require 
post-election reports. Shall preliminary statements also be 
required? As against the latter it is urged that contributors 
whose motives are of the highest character will be deterred by 
the fear of savage partisan criticism. If publicity is delayed 
until after the election campaign bitterness will have subsided 
and a juster view of the whole situation will be possible. In 
favour of publicity before the election it is said that two main 
ends are aimed at by all legislation of this sort ; — first to pre- 
vent the collection and expenditure of enormous sums for the 
bribery of voters and other corrupt purposes, and, second, by 
revealing the source of campaign funds to make it difficult or 
impossible for the victorious party to carry out corrupt bargains 
into which it may have entered in order to obtain large contribu- 
tions. Publicity after the election will, indeed, serve the second 
of these ends, but publicity before would be much more effective 
in preventing corrupt collection and expenditure of funds. 
Moreover it might prevent the victory of the party pursuing 
such a policy and thus, by keeping it out of power, render it in- 
capable of paying by governmental favour for its contributions. 

12. THE CAMPAIGN WAR CHEST 1 

The extent to which the evil of unrestrained contributions 
may grow is illustrated by the experience of New York 
City. Both parties must be helped whenever the " interest" is 
one which can be damaged by hostile legislation or administra- 
tive action. Candidates are chosen with an eye to what they 
can contribute or they are forced to give far beyond what their 
private means would justify. The temptation to go where the 
largest amounts may be obtained makes the party depend for 
its financial support on a class, not on the people. Conversely 
the idea that the party coffers are full cuts down the willingness 

1 Carr, J. F., " Campaign Funds and Campaign Scandals." Outlook, 
Nov. 4, 1905. 



Party Problems and Remedies 307 

of the citizens to do party work except for reasons other than 
principles. 



License to grab from the ' dough-bag ' has become an in- 
alienable birthright for the smaller grafters. Every man who 
renders a service is a voter. He must always be paid more than 
his labor is worth, and his labor is often worth a great deal. A 
bill-poster who toils all night and all the day Sunday pasting his 
flash-bills on barrels and dead-walls is entitled to a high extra 
wage. But no ordinary excess rate is sufficient. An enthusi- 
astic spirit of gratitude must be awakened in the man, if the fires 
of party patriotism are to blaze brightly. Extravagant expec- 
tations are universal, extravagent demands of hourly occurrence. 
Worse still, almost every kind of helper and worker, down to 
the smallest messenger-boy, acts as if the money in the party 
chest did not represent honest labor or honest saving of any kind, 
and as if it properly belonged to any one clever enough to lay 
hands on it. It is 'honest graft,' and human rapacity grows 
vulture-like. For our greatest city election, extravagance be- 
comes such profligacy of expenditure that for each of the last 
three mayoralty campaigns in New York it is estimated that all 
parties spent more than $800,000 ; and yet Mr. Plunkitt, in the 
fullness of knowledge, declares, 'There's never been half enough 
money to go around.' . . 

How are these lavishly spent funds actually raised in this year 
of grace 1905 ? And with what abuses ? Every one knows 
that by far the heaviest contributors are pecuniarily interested 
individuals and corporations. Their assistance has gradually 
grown, and only gradually are its consequences seen. In the 
sixties political contests were chiefly supported by a multitude 
of small contributors. It was a simple and democratic way — 
a help and not a hindrance to popular representative govern- 
ment. To-day the small contributor has almost entirely es- 
caped his duty, and our Assemblymen, Congressmen, and State 
and National Senators are so often the blind agents of 'bosses' 



308 Readings on Parties and Elections 

and corporations that many a time the alarmist seems to utter 
only sober sense when he cries excitedly that our representative 
institutions are in danger. 

A new organization of political parties, with up-to-date busi- 
ness-like methods of plunder, became inevitable whenever in 
the States and cities they sold themselves for the money they 
needed to live the new, extravagant political life. Just as inevi- 
table was the creation of the 'boss,' a man of undisputed and 
irresponsible power, unscrupulous and able in intriguing for pat- 
ronage and collecting money. No two of our 'bosses' are alike 
either in manners, methods, or even in organizing power, but 
they all have the masterful gift of the highwayman. ... As 
the necessity for secrecy makes the 'boss' inevitable, so it is the 
big unavowed contribution, buying or trying to buy an unfair 
privilege, that makes the all-round 'square deal' impossible. 

Neither political sentiment, nor principles, nor even party 
bigotry really determines the majority of these large political 
gifts. Such contributions are usually considered as purely 'a 
business proposition.' The saloon-keeper thinks of his as a 
kind of extra-legal license to sell liquor at forbidden hours. The 
contractor who habitually infringes the building law pays his as 
a bribe of silence. The placeman, as a feudal tenant, reluctantly 
hands his out like ancient scutage, or shield money. For others 
the pay is blackmail, or a hold-up, or a ransom extorted by ban- 
dits, or a form of life or accident insurance. The immediate 
purpose of such gifts may be winning favor or avoiding trouble, 
but the ultimate object is making or saving money. An official 
of a small railroad interest that enters New York City once told 
me that his company made a practice of sending $5,000 to Tam- 
many at the beginning of each campaign. 'We often have to 
ask favors,' he said, 'and it puts us on a friendly footing 
with influential people in the Hall. It is true that we have 
to pay separately for our privileges when we get them, but 
it saves us money in the end. Last year, when we needed to 
run some tracks across an out-of-the-way avenue ' — and he 



Party Problems and Remedies 309 

named the place — ' they made us give up $30,000, but it 
would have cost us double that if we hadn't had a backer in the 
Wigwam.' 

Gifts are often made to both parties by the same donor, and 
contributing corporations calculate with some nicety the power 
of politicians to help or injure them. In a recent campaign 
there was a close contest in one of the New Jersey counties, and, 
certain that he could control the local election if he had aid, the 
Chairman of the Democratic County Committee appealed for 
large financial help to ex-Senator Smith, the ' boss ' of the Jersey 
Democracy. The ex-Senator could not grant the full demand, 
and felt obliged to give some explanation of present Democratic 
poverty in New Jersey. He said that there was a time when 
the State was in the doubtful column and Democrats and Re- 
publicans had an almost equal chance of success, that the 
Pennsylvania Railroad Company treated the Democrats almost 
as handsomely as its Republican favorites, but that ever since 
Bryan's overwhelming defeat in 1896, as the Democrats had not 
the slightest chance of carrying the State, the Pennsylvania had 
not only cut off all its bounties to the Democratic fund, but, with 
all the privileges it needed and fearing no Democratic competi- 
tion in legislative demands, it had greatly reduced the amount 
which it formerly gave the Republicans. Could 'a business 
proposition' be more clearly stated? The two parties have 
several hundred important treasuries, National, State, and muni- 
cipal. Into them these gifts are cast more or less stealthily, 
and no one can estimate their huge gross annual amount. Some 
are criminal; some are probably recoverable by stockholders 
through civil process ; they are nearly all dishonorable to both 
giver and receiver. 

Then there are the donations from candidates, which are al- 
ways ' appreciated ' — a gentle word that often cloaks an im- 
perious demand. No law prevents the voluntary gift, and when 
a man runs for office his supporters usually think that he ought 
to pay a good share of the election expenses. The candidate is 



310 Readings on Parties and Elections 

as frequently of an opposite opinion. I have heard the case 
warmly put in a district club. An upright and uncanting polit- 
ical amateur said: 'We are working for what we believe in. 
Mack should give all he can afford to give. He is in earnest 
enough to head this fight and devote all his time to it. Besides, 
it's partly for the gratification of his ambition.' That is the argu- 
ment in a nutshell, and from that point to suggesting the duty 
of contribution is but a step, and a slightly longer second step to 
the exaction of money as a condition of nomination. . . 

The objections to these bargained or unbargained assessments 
of candidates are so serious that they should be altogether pro- 
hibited by law. They create an undue advantage in favor of 
men of wealth as against men of character and ability, and they 
mean that many young men mortgage their whole public future 
for the help which they receive at the outset of their political 
career, when they incur obligations which they can pay only by 
prostituting their official positions. 

But a far graver abuse, that has become a National scandal, 
is the assessment of office-holders. . . The opportunities 
for wringing this despicably mean toll from the most poorly paid 
of the Government's servants are almost boundless, for there 
are about 280,000 men and women in the classified Civil Service, 
receiving salaries reaching a total each year of $175,000,000 — 
an annual wage of only $625 for each employee. 

Everywhere campaign committees send their requests for 
subscriptions to subordinate Federal office-holders. Their terms 
are almost invariably polite, and they assume that the contribu- 
tion is to be wholly voluntary. But these casual printed or 
typewritten appeals are understood by the Government em- 
ployees to be perfectly definite orders to contribute or suffer 
the consequences. Many would resist the injustice of such a 
demand, but they believe that to do so would be to quarrel with 
their bread and butter. On the whole, perhaps the notion is 
absurd, but every department can furnish a few examples which 
lend color to the belief that complaint to the authorities is dan- 



Party Problems and Remedies 311 

gerous. Besides, there is a spirit abroad in the service that holds 
such an act treason. But the call is not always gently veiled ; 
it often becomes a peremptory demand. Some of the cases in 
the last campaign were flagrant. In Kentucky postal clerks 
and other employees of the Rural Free Delivery were by letter 
ordered to stand and deliver in the following fashion: 'The 
position you hold in the party shows your active interest in its 
principles and policies and your desire for its success. We there- 
fore confidently expect aid from you and hope to receive a liberal 
contribution for the legitimate purpose only of paying the ex- 
penses of our organization. We trust your contribution will 
not be less than $70.' The Chairman of the Iowa Republican 
State Committee sent a letter to each Iowan in the classified 
service in Washington, requesting what he called 'the surrender 
of an equitable part of the salary you are receiving from the Gov- 
ernment,' and he defined the 'equitable part' to be three per 
cent, of the clerk's salary. 

The law of the land does not forbid office-holders to contribute 
to campaign funds, if they wish to do so. It merely prohibits 
one office-holder from approaching another with such a demand, 
and no one is permitted to solicit political contributions in a Fed- 
eral building. It is an easy matter to evade a lax law, and so 
little legal evidence sufficiently definite to warrant a prosecution 
is ever laid before the Civil Service Commission that prosecu- 
tions are rarely begun. . . 

These methods of filling party coffers are in general use to- 
day in the present State and municipal campaigns. By the tens of 
thousands such letters and circulars are now being sent out from 
political headquarters. They take many forms. One will begin 
with a covert threat: 'I am directed on behalf of the Finance 
Committee — .' Another, typewritten and in the usual style 
giving among names of the Finance Committee four city officials, 
is, in defiance of law, sent to hundreds of place-holders. The 
Chairman claims that he did not know that the addresses were 
city employees. A third typewritten letter is signed with a rub- 



312 Readings on Parties and Elections 

ber stamp, and, in absence of proof that its use was authorized, 
prosecution is impossible. . . 

Our present way of financing campaigns has become a part of 
the political system of the land. A private individual is now 
rarely asked for a contribution, and the money gifts of disin- 
terested citizens have dwindled until they are an entirely negli- 
gible source of revenue. Now and again a reform movement is 
so supported, but even in such cases by far the largest part of 
the fund raised is supplied by a small number of wealthy men, 
who thus exert an influence out of all proportion to their num- 
bers on the policies of parties. They are often full of self-sacri- 
fice and noble ideals, but because they are out of sympathy with 
the great mass of the people for whom they labor, they are con- 
tinually building on sand. The days of the rank and file sub- 
scriptions of $2 and $5 seem gone forever. Men punctually pay 
as a matter of course for the support of their churches, clubs, 
benefit societies, and newspapers ; and they should do the same 
for their political parties. But a generation has grown up with 
an idea that a party should be self-supporting. Yet political 
parties are not wealth-producers, and they are fast reaching a 
point, even Nationally, where they can maintain themselves 
only by selling, or pretending to sell, a part of the public rights 
of which they are the custodians through the officers whom they 
elect. The politicians to a man are skeptical of the possibility 
of supporting a political campaign by popular contributions, 
and their cynicism completes the despairing side of the picture. 
Privately their scoffing is voluble — there is no way but the 
present way, and that is the best of all possible ways. Publicly 
they are silent or noncommittal. . . 

But a politician sees the worst side of human nature, and, 
like a policeman, is a bad judge of the morals of the common run 
of men. There are two hopes for the future, and both are bright. 
There is a remarkable revival of civic righteousness sweeping 
over the land that is awakening men to a loftier conception of 
their duties as citizens. With this an aroused public sentiment 



Party Problems and Remedies 313 

already demands the enactment of a law against corporate con- 
tributions. When political managers feel the pinch of this le- 
gally enforced poverty, they will be driven to appeal to the 
pocket of the individual voter. Plunkitt in his wrath against 
the Civil Service blurted out a deeper truth than he knew of 
when he said that a political organization is like a church. 'It 
does missionary work like a church, it's got big expenses, and 
it's got to be supported by the faithful.' The churches that are 
maintained by small voluntary contributions from thousands of 
worshipers are living, growing realities. Those whose support 
comes from endowments and the donations of a few wealthy 
communicants have already lost their usefulness. The 'boss' 
is the man who can procure the 'dough,' and the autocracy that 
he has founded among us has its origin in the failure of citizens 
not only to exercise their political rights, but to furnish the money 
for the absolutely necessary expenses of their political parties. 
Representation without taxation is becoming fully as great a 
wrong as taxation without representation. 

A renewal of the old custom of small contributions for a cam- 
paign would give a different quality to the fund, and induce re- 
spect for it. An honest subscription for a legitimate purpose, 
it could no longer be looked upon as 'honest graft,' and economy 
of expenditure and public accounting would follow. Fifteen 
million dollars is probably the wildest estimate that has been 
placed on the immediate cost of the last Presidential campaign. 
Yet this amounts to but $1.11 for each elector. A fifty-cent 
piece from every voter would more than cover every lawful ex- 
pense of a campaign, and go far toward freeing both parties 
from the evil influence of 'bosses' and corporations. 



314 Readings on Parties and Elections 

13. CAMPAIGN EXPENDITURES AND PUBLICITY 1 

One of the most interesting attempts to put down the evil 
of excessive party expenditures is the expedient adopted by 
Oregon to fix the cost of running for office. 

The corrupt practices act was adopted under the initiative 
in 1908 by popular vote of 54,042 to 31,301. It provides that no 
candidate for office shall expend in his campaign for nomination 
more than 15 per cent of one year's compensation of the office 
for which he is a candidate, provided that no candidate shall be 
restricted to less than $100. 

Publicity Pamphlet 

The act provides, however, for the publication of a pamphlet 
by the secretary of state for the information of voters, in which 
pamphlet a candidate in the primary campaign may have pub- 
lished a statement setting forth his qualifications, the principles 
and policies he advocates and favors, or any other matter he 
may wish to submit in support of his candidacy. Each candi- 
date must pay for at least one page, the amount to be paid vary- 
ing from $100 for the highest office to $10 for the minor offices. 
Every candidate may secure the use of additional pages at $100 
per page, not exceeding three additional pages. Any person 
may use space in this pamphlet in opposition to any candidate, 
the matter submitted by him being first served upon the candi- 
date and the space being paid for the same as in the case of candi- 
dates. The matter submitted in opposition to candidates must 
be signed by the author, who is subject to the general laws re- 
garding slander and libel. Information regarding state and 
congressional candidates is printed in a pamphlet issued by the 
secretary of state, one copy being mailed to each registered voter 
in the State. Pamphlets regarding county candidates are issued 
by the county clerk and mailed to each voter in the county. 

1 Bourne, Jr., J., Speech in the United States Senate. Thurs., Mays, I 9 IO J 
p. 13 et sea. (pam.). 



Party Problems and Remedies 315 

These pamphlets must be mailed at least eight days before the 
primary election. The amount of money paid for space in the 
public pamphlet of information is not considered in determining 
the amount each candidate has expended in his campaign ; that 
is, he is entitled to expend in his primary campaign 15 per cent 
of one year's compensation in addition to what he pays for space 
in the public pamphlet. 

Prior to the general election the executive committee or man- 
aging officers of any political party or organization may file 
with the secretary of state portrait cuts of its candidates and 
typewritten statements and arguments for the success of its 
principles and the election of its candidates and opposing or 
attacking the principles and candidates of all other parties. 
This same privilege applies to independent candidates. These 
statements and arguments are printed in a pamphlet and mailed 
to the registered voters of the State not later than the tenth day 
before the general election. 

Each party is limited to 24 pages, and each independent can- 
didate to 2 pages, each page in this pamphlet being charged for 
at the rate of $50 per page. In the campaign preceding the gen- 
eral election each candidate is limited in campaign expenditures 
to 10 per cent of one year's compensation. 

For the purposes of this act the contribution, expenditure, 
or liability of a descendant, ascendant, brother, sister, uncle, 
aunt, nephew, niece, wife, partner, employer, employee, or fel- 
low-official or fellow-employee of a corporation is deemed to be 
that of the candidate himself. Any person not a candidate 
spending more than $50 in a campaign must file an itemized ac- 
count of his expenditures in the office of the secretary of state or 
the county clerk and give a copy of the account to the candidate 
for whom or against whom the money was spent. 

Legitimate Use of Money within Limit 

While the corrupt practices act limits the candidate to the 
expenditure of 15 per cent of one year's salary in his primary 



3 16 Readings on Parties and Elections 

campaign and 10 per cent of a year's salary in the general cam- 
paign, in addition to what he pays for space in the publicity 
pamphlet, yet the law does not prohibit any legitimate use of 
money within this limitation. The act makes it possible for a 
man of moderate means to be a candidate upon an equality with 
a man of wealth. 

Let us take a concrete example, as a means of illustrating the 
operation of Oregon's corrupt practices act. The salary of the 
governor is $5,000 a year. A candidate for the nomination for 
governor may take a maximum of 4 pages in the publicity pam- 
phlet, and thus, at a cost of $400, be able to reach every registered 
voter of his party in the entire State. In addition to that $400 
he may spend $750, or 15 per cent of one year's salary, in any 
other manner he may choose, not in violation of the corrupt 
practices act. A candidate may purchase space in the advertis- 
ing columns of a newspaper, but in order that this paid adver- 
tising shall not be mistaken for news the law requires that all 
paid articles be marked as such. 

The law expressly provides that none of its provisions shall 
be construed as relating to the rendering of services by speakers, 
writers, publishers, or others for which no compensation is asked 
or given, nor to prohibit expenditure by committees of political 
parties or organizations for public speakers, music, halls, lights, 
literature, advertising, office rent, printing, postage, clerk hire, 
challengers or watchers at the polls, traveling expenses, tele- 
graphing or telephoning, or the making of poll lists. 

The successful nominee in the primary may spend in his gen- 
eral campaign 10 per cent of one year's salary, this expenditure, in 
the case of a candidate for governor, being $500. In addition to 
this 10 per cent of a year's salary he may contribute toward the 
payment for his party's statement in the publicity pamphlet to 
be mailed by the secretary of state to every registered voter. In 
the publicity pamphlet for the general campaign each party may 
use not to exceed 24 pages, at $50 per page, making the total cost 
to the party committee $1,200, or about $100 for each candidate. 



Party Problems and Remedies 317 

The candidate is therefore limited to an expenditure of $600 
in his general campaign, only $100 of which is necessary in order 
to enable him to reach every registered voter. He could reach 
every registered voter in his party in the primary campaign for 
$400. Under no other system could a candidate reach all the 
voters in two campaigns at a total cost of $500. 

Improper Acts Prohibited 

The Oregon corrupt practices act encourages and aids pub- 
licity, but prohibits the excessive or improper use of money or 
other agencies for the subversion of clean elections. Among 
the acts which are prohibited I may mention these : 

Promises of appointments in return for political support. 

Solicitation or acceptance of campaign contributions from or 
payment of contributions by persons holding appointive positions. 

Publication or distribution of anonymous letters or circulars 
regarding candidates or measures before the people. 

Sale of editorial support or the publication of paid political 
advertising without marking it "Paid advertising." 

Use of carriages in conveying voters to the polls. 

Active electioneering or soliciting votes on election day. 

Campaign contributions by quasi public or certain other im- 
portant classes of corporations generally affected by legislation. 

Intimidation or coercion of voters in any manner. 

Soliciting candidates to subscribe to religious, charitable, 
public, and semi-public enterprises ; but this does not prohibit 
regular payments to any organization of which the candidate 
has been a member, or to which he has been a contributor for 
more than six months before his candidacy. 

Contribution of funds in the name of any other than the per- 
son furnishing the money. 

Treating by candidates as a means of winning favor. 

Payment or promise to reward another for the purpose of in- 
ducing him to become or refrain from becoming or cease being 
a candidate, or solicitation of such consideration. 



3 1 8 Readings on Parties and Elections 

Betting on an election by a candidate, or betting on an elec- 
tion by any other person with intent to influence the result. 

Attempting to vote in the name of another person, living, 
dead, or fictitious. 

Publicity of Campaign Expenditures 

There is no interference with such legitimate acts as tend to 
secure full publicity and free expression of opinion. Personal 
and political liberty is in no way infringed upon, the only pur- 
pose being to prohibit the excessive use of money, promises of 
appointment, or deception and fraud. 

The corrupt practices act requires that every candidate shall 
file an itemized statement of his campaign expenditures within 
fifteen days after the primary election, including in such state- 
ment not only all amounts expended, but all debts incurred or 
unfulfilled promises made. 

Every political committee must have a treasurer, and cause 
him to keep a detailed account of its receipts, payments, and 
liabilities. Any committee or agent or representative of a candi- 
date must file an itemized statement of receipts and expendi- 
tures within ten days after the election. The books of account 
of any treasurer of any political party, committee, or organiza- 
tion during an election campaign shall be open at all reasonable 
office hours to the inspection of the treasurer and chairman of 
any opposing political party or organization for the same elec- 
toral district. Failure to file statements as required by law is 
punishable by fine. 

The candidate violating any section of the corrupt practices 
act forfeits his right to the office. Any other person violating 
any section of this act is punished by imprisonment of not more 
than one year in the county jail or a fine of not more than $5,000 
or both. The candidate is also subject to the same penalties. 



Party Problems and Remedies 319 

14. THE CORRUPT PRACTICE LAWS OF MARYLAND x 

Though state legislation on corrupt practices leaves much 
to be desired, several states have fairly complete laws defining acts 
which must not be committed in connection with elections. 
Typical of the better class of these statutes are those passed 
by Maryland. 

Maryland. Cd. '04, Art. XXVII, sec. 29. Giving or promis- 
ing any reward to influence voters, or keeping open any place 
where intoxicating liquors or victuals are gratuitously dispensed 
upon an election day is punished by imprisonment and fine. 

Art. XXXIII, sees. 87-102. Registering in the name of an- 
other or where one is not a qualified elector or aiding another 
to so illegally register, or, preventing by force, intimidation or 
bribery the registering or voting of one who has a legal right to 
register or vote is punished by imprisonment in the county jail 
or the penitentiary for from six months to five years. One con- 
victed of bribery or attempting to vote when disfranchised is 
punished by imprisonment in the penitentiary for from one to 
five years. False declarations of one's ability to mark one's 
ballot or marking one's ballot so that it may be discovered how 
he has voted, is penalized. Every employe who is qualified to 
vote is entitled to absent himself from his employment not longer 
than four hours to vote and is liable to no penalty therefor. 
Disposing of liquors on election day or making any bet upon 
the elections is punished by a fine. 

Laws '08, p. 125, sees. 163-172. Every political committee 
must operate through a political treasurer who must submit a 
sworn itemized statement of all money passing through his hands 
and state to whom it was paid and for what purpose. Failure 
to do so subjects him to a fine of from $300 to $1,000 or to a two 
years imprisonment or both. None but a candidate may within 
six months of an election contribute money or property to 

1 Lowrie, S. G., Corrupt Practices at Elections. Madison, Wis., Feb. 191 1, 
pp. 38-40. (Summary.) 



320 Readings on Parties and Elections 

the success or defeat of a candidate, party or proposition except 
through a political committee. No candidate may within six 
months of a campaign make any such payments except an 
amount determined by the number of voters voting at the 
last election for the office he seeks and for such personal ex- 
penses as postage, printing, telegraphing, travel, etc. The 
political treasurer may expend money only for certain desig- 
nated purposes such as conducting public meetings, printing and 
circulating campaign literature, expenses of committee head- 
quarters, traveling expenses, carriages for voters on election day, 
etc. Payments must be reasonable for the services performed 
and be authorized by the political secretary or chairman. All 
campaign material issued in periodicals shall be designated " ad- 
vertising." Within twenty days after an election or primary, 
detailed, sworn statements must be filed, stating what the as- 
sets and liabilities of the political committee have been during 
the campaign. Failure to record such a statement is punish- 
able by a fine of from $300 to $1,000. Such statements are to 
be on file and open to public inspection for three years. It is a 
corrupt practice to give, offer, or receive money or other induce- 
ments to influence voters; to make campaign contributions, 
except to a political agent or treasurer, or to make any payments 
in a name other than one's own ; for employers to attempt to in- 
fluence the political actions of their employes by notices posted 
in the establishment or printed on pay envelopes threatening a 
lessening of wages or work in the event of any election contin- 
gency; or to give entertainment to a voter to influence him. 
Violation of these provisions is penalized by a fine of from $300 
to $1,000, imprisonment and ineligibility for public office for 
four years. The officers or agents of a corporation who make 
corporation contributions to any political campaign fund are 
personally liable to a fine not to exceed $5,000 and imprisonment 
not exceeding three years. 

Laws '10, p. 126. What are offenses against the general elec- 
tion laws are also offenses if committed in the primary and are 



Party Problems and Remedies 321 

punishable in the same way. Penalties are specified for the sale 
of liquors and for betting on the primary. 

Candidates for the U. S. Senate must file within thirty days 
of the primary, sworn, itemized statements of their expenses. 
No certificates of election are to be issued until campaign ex- 
pense accounts have been filed and verified. Failure to file 
statements is punished by a fine of from $300 to $2,000 and im- 
prisonment not longer than two years or both. 

15. THE CHICAGO MUNICIPAL VOTERS' LEAGUE 1 

The large number of names on our ballots and the fact 
that in our cities the average man does not know the candidates, 
has made it necessary, if the voter is to vote intelligently, to 
have some extralegal organizations which will place before the 
voter the facts upon which a judgment as between various candi- 
dates can be made. The Chicago Municipal Voters' League 
has been unusually successful in this work. 

(a) Its Organization 

The Municipal Voters' League — What it Really is. 

The Municipal Voters' League is an independent political 
organization the sole purpose of which is the election of honest 
and competent municipal officials in Chicago. It has confined 
its attention to members of the City Council. It is absolutely 
non-partisan and intensely practical. It was organized in 1896 
by a Committee of One Hundred, composed of a Republican 
and a Democrat from each of the thirty-four wards then in the 
city, and thirty-two members chosen from the city at large with- 
out regard to residence or political affiliations. This Committee 
of One Hundred was the result of a meeting of about two hundred 
and fifty representatives of various clubs and organizations called 
together to devise some means of improving conditions in the 
City Council, which had reached the final stage of open and 
shameless corruption and had become a most dangerous menace 

1 Pamphlet published by the Chicago Municipal Voters' League, 1910. 



322 Readings on Parties and Elections 

to the city. The Municipal Voters' League thus formed con- 
sists of an Executive Committee of nine men, supported by a 
large general membership of many thousands of voters in all 
parts of the city, who signed cards in 1896, expressing approval 
of its purposes and methods, or who have since identified them- 
selves with its work, or supported its recommendations at the 
polls. 

The members of the Executive Committee serve for three 
years, the term of one-third of the committee expiring each year. 
Vacancies are filled by the unanimous vote of those holding over. 
No meetings of the general membership are held ; but the Exec- 
utive Committee appoints a Finance Committee and an Advisory 
Committee outside of its own membership. The Executive 
Committee alone has the authority to use the name of the 
League, or to commit it for or against any candidate or measure. 
No candidate for office can become or remain a member of the 
Executive Committee. 

There has never been a division on political lines. Indeed, 
in the entire history of the League there has been but one im- 
portant action taken that was not directed by the unanimous 
vote of the Executive Committee. 

By thoroughly investigating the qualifications and character 
of aldermanic candidates and fearlessly publishing the results of 
such investigations, the Municipal Voters' League has deservedly 
won the confidence and support of the honest and intelligent 
voters of Chicago. It assumes that character and capacity are 
the fundamental qualifications for useful public service; that 
men having these qualities will faithfully represent the people, 
treat justly all private interests and dispose of every public 
question on its merits. It represents, and it claims to represent, 
only those who approve of its purposes and its methods. It 
makes no pretenses of infallibility, and guarantees the future 
conduct of none of the candidates whose election it may advise. 
It simply recommends to the voters of Chicago that course 
which its investigations lead it to believe will be for their best 



Party Problems and Remedies 323 

interests; and it states concisely, but clearly, the facts upon 
which its conclusions rest. It has no political or personal in- 
terest to serve ; no scheme to which it is committed. It knows 
neither creed, nor class, nor party. It has but one aim — the 
election of honest and capable officials, to whom the interests of 
the entire city are of paramount importance. It does not seek 
to foist on any ward a candidate of its selection. It does seek 
to co-operate in every ward with good citizens of every party 
in the formation and execution of plans for securing the nomina- 
tion of men for whose election it can actively exert its efforts and 
its influence. 

It is the policy of the League not to suggest candidates in 
the first instance, but to investigate and report on those named 
by others. When necessary to secure at least one fit candidate in 
a given ward, it actively co-operates with the public-spirited cit- 
izens of that ward in securing the nomination of such a candidate 
at the party primaries, or by petition. When the nominations 
have all been made, the League takes an active part in the wards 
where there is danger of the election of unfit men. In such cases 
it not only takes efficient measures to inform and arouse the 
voters but it participates as an active political factor in the al- 
dermanic campaign, using every legitimate means to carry the 
election. It has no use for impractical idealism, and it chases 
no rainbows. It believes in seizing and using whatever proper 
means may be at hand to reach the best practically attainable 
results. 

Each year the League adopts a little platform which is con- 
fined to a declaration of those general and fundamental principles 
which seem essential to the preservation of the rights of the peo- 
ple and the proper administration of our municipal affairs. 
Sometimes there is a special issue which may afford a test of the 
sincerity and intelligence of those general pledges of honesty and 
fidelity so readily given and so easily evaded. The League does 
not neglect such opportunities. Its platform is tendered to each 
candidate for his approval, disapproval, or modification. If it 



324 Readings on Parties and Elections 

does not accurately express the views of any candidate he is not 
only at liberty, but the League desires him to make such modifi- 
cations for himself as will render the platform to which he does 
subscribe the accurate expression of his own opinions. The 
League desires no man to sign its platform because it is its plat- 
form. It does insist, however, that every aldermanic candidate 
shall in some way state fully, definitely, and publicly his own 
views upon the important issues and principles involved. . . 

(b) Its Platform x 

1. The aldermanic office involves service for the whole people. 
An alderman should discharge his duties with an eye not solely to 
the local interests of his ward, but to the city's interests at large. 

2. The office of alderman is non-partisan in its nature, and 
should be discharged without reference to party affiliations. 

3. All council committees should be organized strictly on the 
basis of integrity and fitness and without regard to party. 

4. No alderman should accept or hold any duty or employ- 
ment, or be, directly or indirectly, connected with, or engaged 
in, any business or enterprise in conflict with the city's interest, 
or tending to interfere with the disinterested discharge of his 
duties, or to prevent his unrestricted activity for the public good. 

5. No alderman should seek or demand a permit, special 
privilege or immunity for any individual or corporation in con- 
flict with the public interest, or denied to the citizens generally. 

6. The health and welfare of the people depend in large 
measure on hygienic and sanitary conditions, and every alder- 
man should strive to have these constantly improved and main- 
tained in the best possible state. The public health should in 
no instance be sacrificed to special interests. 

7. The city in all its departments should have a thorough 
and businesslike system of accounting and auditing. Through 
periodic examinations, the employment of experts and the tech- 

1 Platform of the Chicago Municipal Voters' League, 191 1, Chicago 
Record-Herald, Mar. 29, 191 1 (excerpt). 



Party Problems and Remedies 325 

nical study of the functions, administration and requirements of 
the various branches of municipal government, improved busi- 
ness methods should be introduced into all of them, so that not 
only may economies be effected, but the most approved and 
skilled service rendered to the people. 

8. An alderman should uphold the strict enforcement of the 
civil service law and the application of the merit system to 
municipal employment. 

9. Grants for street railways, subways, tunnels, wharves, 
docks and other public utilities, including telephone, telegraph, 
gas and electric lighting, heating, refrigerating, power and other 
like services, should be for as short a term as is consistent with 
the best service to the public; provided, no grant for a term 
exceeding twenty years should become effective unless and until 
approved on a referendum. All grants to a given corporation or 
individual should expire at the same time, and no supplemental 
or collateral grant should run beyond the time when the main 
grant expires. 

10. No grant should be made for any public utility without 
expressly reserving to the city the opportunity for municipal 
purchase, at or before the expiration of such grant, upon fair 
terms and reasonable notice. . . 

I, the undersigned, a candidate for alderman from the 

ward, freely place the foregoing platform before my constitu- 
ents and the whole people of the City of Chicago and pledge my- 
self to adhere to these principles and to work and to vote in com- 
mittee and on the floor of the council to carry out the same. 

(c) Its Estimate of Candidates 1 

To the Voters of Chicago : For the sixteenth year 
the Municipal Voters' League submits to the people of 
Chicago its official report and recommendations for the alder- 
manic elections. 

1 Extract from report in Chicago Record-Herald, Mar. 24, 191 1. 



326 Readings on Parties and Elections 

Not the mayor, but the aldermen will settle the price of gas 
and of telephones and such big questions as the subway and the 
harbor. No matter who is elected mayor it is of vital impor- 
tance to have an able and honest council. Do not neglect the 
aldermanic contest in your ward. Vote for the best man re- 
gardless of his party or mayoralty affiliations. . . 

Seventeenth Ward (Short Term) — Vote for Walkowiak 

Stanley S. Walkowiak — Democrat; lives 13 10 Cornel street; 
lawyer, 132 South Clark street; born in the ward 1877; gradu- 
ate St. Stanislaus parochial school ; two years Notre Dame Uni- 
versity, and graduate St. Ignatius College 1900, and of Chicago 
College of Law 1903 ; ran for alderman last year, at which time 
league criticised his political affiliations ; man of ability, energy 
and ambition ; well spoken of by men competent to judge, who 
consider that he may develop independence and exhibit ability 
which would be a credit to the ward; signed league platform. 

Stephen P. Revere — Republican ; lives 1057 Grand avenue ; 
until recently superintendent Illinois Free Employment office; 
born San Andreas, Cal., 1856; common school education; in 
ward forty-five years; former contractor; in council 1885-7 an d 
again in 1895-7 where he made record as constant supporter of 
franchise grabs; in 1897 when Revere was a candidate against 
James Walsh gross election frauds were committed in Revere's 
interest. Walsh contested the election, carried his case to the 
Supreme Court, and won against the active fight made by Revere 
and the gang members in the council. Revere was unseated and 
the judges of election who committed the fraud sent to the peni- 
tentiary. This former gangster should be kept out of the council, 
which he disgraced so far as was in his power while he was an 
alderman. . . 

Nineteenth Ward — Vote for Cimbalo 

Michele Cimbalo — Socialist ; lives 920 South Morgan street ; 
inspector for Immigrants' Protective League, 157 Plymouth 
court ; born Italy 1884 ; in Chicago and ward fourteen years ; 



Party Problems and Remedies 327 

general course University of Illinois eighteen months ; shepherd 
in Italy, newsboy, water boy for railroad gangs, later book- 
binder by trade, then stationary fireman ; intelligent and ener- 
getic. 

Onofrio Pacelli — Republican; lives 518 Ewing street; fore- 
man on street car work ; nine years in bailiff's office ; not well 
qualified. 

John Powers — Democrat; lives 1284 Macalister place; 
president Pullman Chemical Company, 1701 North Ashland 
avenue ; finishing eleventh term ; successor of Cullerton as gang 
leader for corporate influences ; has systematically betrayed the 
people of the ward and injured the people of the city ; telephone 
"jammer"; the man in charge of the passage of the notorious 
Ogden gas ordinance. . . 

16. NATIONAL PARTIES IN LOCAL ELECTIONS * 

The peculiar national character of our party organization 
has made all elections except that of the president subservient 
to the national party interests. Local issues as a rule do not 
dominate local elections even when held at times when no 
national officers are to be elected. 

How shall the political machinists conduct themselves and 
their machinery in a state election where national political issues 
are not directly involved ? Theoretically, they may refrain from 
taking any part in the state election supposed, but practically 
there are great obstacles in the way of this quiescence. In the 
first place, the election may be, and very commonly is, both na- 
tional and local. President, congressman, governor, legislature, 
mayor, and city council are often voted for on the same ballot. 
Let us suppose that A and B prefer X for president, and that C 
and D prefer Y. A and D prefer U for governor, B and C prefer 
Z. It is difficult, at the least, for A, after spending his morning 
with B in planning how to defeat Y, D's candidate for the presi- 

1 Lowell, F. C, "The American Boss," Atlantic, 1900; pp. 292-293. 



328 Readings on Parties and Elections 

dency, to spend the afternoon with D in planning the defeat of 
Z, B's candidate for governor. The difficulty is greatly in- 
creased, indeed it becomes insuperable, if A and D agree in con- 
sidering the presidential election so much more important than 
the gubernatorial that each of them would, in case of necessity, 
sacrifice his gubernatorial to realize his presidential preferences. 
Even if the national, state, and municipal elections occur at 
different times, the trouble just suggested exists, though in a 
less degree. Political machinery is not created at a week's no- 
tice, or in a month's. In truth, the difficulty is fundamental in 
human nature. Men do not vote for Republican candidates 
altogether because of a reasoned preference for these candidates 
as individuals, or for the principles which Republican candidates 
are supposed to represent. Most voters are largely influenced 
by habit, tradition, and sentiment. That a man is a consistent 
Democrat often means little more than that he is attached to 
the Democratic name, and always votes for Democratic candi- 
dates because they are labeled with it. Such a Democrat 
naturally prefers a Democratic governor to a Republican gover- 
nor, a Democratic alderman to a Republican alderman, although 
the principles of the Democratic national party have little or 
nothing to do with the action of governors and aldermen. This 
disposition of the voters makes it almost impossible to separate 
local from state politics, or to keep the machinery primarily de- 
vised for national purposes from use in local elections. Munici- 
pal elections outside the large cities, indeed, when they occur 
apart from state and national elections, are not infrequently con- 
ducted with little regard for national politics; so sometimes is 
the election in a single legislative district. But these important 
and interesting exceptions cannot hide the rule or the conditions 
of human nature upon which the rule is based. To expect those 
who manage the local machinery of a national party to keep 
that machinery idle in a state election, or in the municipal elec- 
tion of a large city, is to expect the impossible under existing 
conditions. The introduction of national politics into local 



Party Problems and Remedies 329 

elections is caused not so much by the intrigues of political 
machinists as by the workings of ordinary human nature. 

If, then, the parties and their machinery are to be the same 
in national and state elections, and commonly the same in na- 
tional and municipal elections, how will the operative machinist, 
who is thoroughly and unselfishly devoted to the national 
triumph of his party's principles and candidates, regard the local 
election in which he and his machine are to take part? After 
examining the standpoint of an ideal machinist, we can lower 
our view to that of the machinist of less exalted character. 
Plainly, a state or municipal election is not unlikely to disturb 
the working of political machinery which has been created to 
affect national elections. If there is a real issue in local politics, 
even if the personality of a candidate for local ofhce is marked, 
some voters who are Republicans on national issues will vote the 
Democratic local ticket. Though this loss will be made good 
more or less by the votes of some who are Democrats on national 
issues, yet the change will disarrange the Republican machine 
and may endanger the success of its party's national principles. 
A machinist seeks to bring out the full Republican or Democratic 
vote, and to increase that vote within certain limits, by improved 
machinery. He dreads great changes, even though they are 
in his own favor, for he knows that they bring their reaction. 
If the state branch of the national party adopts an important 
state issue, he knows that some of his men will stray, and, worse 
than all, that carefully formed habits of partisan discipline will 
be weakened; hence, so far as state politics are concerned, he 
tends to caution. The voters of his party may believe in pro- 
hibition, high license, low license, or unrestricted sale of liquor, 
so long as the working of his machinery is not disturbed. The 
Republican machine in Massachusetts, for instance, once pro- 
cured the submission to the people of a prohibitory amendment 
to the state constitution, but declined to take sides upon the 
amendment's adoption. The machine wished to get the ques- 
tion out of its way without losing support by taking sides. The 



330 Readings on Parties and Elections 

faithful national machinist will also dread the disturbance caused 
by an exciting municipal election, and here the man whose chief 
interest is in state politics will agree with him. If the machinist 
is honest and well-intentioned, he will desire honest and efficient 
administration by his party in city and state, as well as in the 
nation, knowing that this will commend his machinery and the 
principles it exists to promote ; but he will hesitate to disarrange 
the machinery by violent interference with a particular piece of 
maladministration, especially if it concerns the state or munici- 
pality rather than the nation. 

17. MUNICIPAL POLITICS AND BOSSISM * 

City populations furnish the greatest opportunity for bad 
political conditions since the people do not know each other 
and because they are within easy reach of those who wish to 
manipulate their suffrages. Some of the ways in which the 
"boss" succeeds in getting a firm grip upon the local government 
are indicated here. 

The political forces that resist every advance toward the 
attainment of government accountable to the people governed 
and make for the establishment of a government in the interest 
of a privileged few are nowhere so active or so powerful as in 
the city. The city itself creates the economic conditions that 
give these forces full play. The urgent needs of the city's com- 
munity-life for water, transportation, light, telephonic communi- 
cation, and similar communal services can only be met through 
governmental action. The men engaged in supplying these 
services are necessarily in the most intimate and constant con- 
tact with the city government, while the business interests and 
occupations of the vast majority of men bring them but rarely if 
at all into conscious relation with the government of the city in 
which they live. 

1 Deming, H. E., Government of American Cities. G. P. Putnam's Sons, 
New York, 1910; pp. 192-197. 



Party Problems and Remedies 331 

On the one hand, the satisfaction of urgent community- 
needs has created a class of special businesses which are made 
profitable by influencing governmental action ; on the other, is 
the great mass of the citizens to whom any special effort to reach 
or influence a city official involves business loss. The enjoyers 
of special privilege have been constantly watchful of the conduct 
of city government and constantly active in securing the elec- 
tion and appointment of public officials favorable to their busi- 
ness plans. The general body of the citizens, secure under 
the constitution in their personal and property rights and ab- 
sorbed in business callings and occupations that neither need 
special assistance nor invite any interference from the city gov- 
ernment, have paid, at most, only so much attention to it as 
voting for their regular party candidates on election day might 
require and, perhaps, at times contributing to their party's 
treasury. 

The exploiters of the need for transit, light, and other public 
services have found in each city a natural ally in every man who 
desired some selfish personal advantage from its government. 
The domination of the state legislature over municipal affairs 
brings to the state capital the franchise seekers from every city, 
there to work in congenial and unwholesome fellowship with 
every other special interest in quest of legislative largess. 
Neither is the hunter of governmental bounty unknown to 
Washington. His insidious influence has been felt in every de- 
partment of our government. The same cause, hunger for the 
enormously valuable special privileges at the disposal of govern- 
ment under modern economic conditions, has been active in 
nation, state, and city. 

The privilege-seeker has pervaded our political life. For his 
own profit he has wilfully befouled the sources of political power. 
Politics, which should offer a career inspiring to the noblest 
thoughts and calling for the most patriotic efforts of which man is 
capable, he has, so far as he could, transformed into a series of 
sordid transactions between those who buy and those who sell 



331 Readings on Parties and Elections 

governmental action. His success has depended upon hiding 
the methods by which he has gained his ends. All the forms 
through which the voters are accustomed to exercise their rights 
have been strictly observed. Untroubled by conscientious 
scruples, consistently non-partisan, he has welcomed the sup- 
port of every party and been prompt to reward the aid of any 
political manager. Step by step he gained control of the party 
machinery. His fellow citizens have been in profound ignorance 
that he named all the candidates among whom they made their 
futile choice on election day. 

For a long time our real government had not been the one 
described in constitution or statute ; our electoral methods had 
long ceased to furnish a genuine opportunity for the expression 
of the popular will ; the actual government had passed into the 
control of an elaborate feudal system with its lords and overlords, 
each with his retinue of followers and dependents, all supported 
at the expense of the public ; yet the people were quite unaware 
that the ancient methods upon which they relied in order to have 
an effective participation in the conduct of the government and 
to secure public officials responsible to them and actively con- 
cerned to protect the common interest and promote the common 
good were rapidly becoming mere shams. 

In every department of human affairs requiring the exhibition 
of skill, the expert, sooner or later, inevitably becomes promi- 
nent. There was an insistent demand for the expert of every 
grade from the highest to the lowest in an undertaking involving 
so much knowledge of human nature, such mastery of detail, so 
much persistence of effort, and such adroitness as the conduct of 
government by purchase under the guise of a government by 
the people. In response to this demand came the "Boss," the 
expert who attended to the infinite details and complications of 
party management and organization and supplied the public 
officials — and thereby the kind of government — the privilege- 
seeker desired. 

The boss was a distinct advantage to the class that throve 



Party Problems and Remedies ^33 

by government favors. His real occupation was unknown to 
the people, and if at first they did not welcome his appearance 
they thought him nevertheless the natural and perfectly legiti- 
mate outcome of their accustomed political methods, a leader 
whom they could displace when he lost their approval. They 
did not realize his ominous significance. Gradually it began to 
dawn upon them that they could neither select nor elect him; 
that he was not a person, but a system. The individual might 
disappear or be displaced, but the boss always remained. Not 
until his sinister figure was appearing in city after city and state 
after state and even in the United States senate, not until 
there was overwhelming evidence of a hierarchy of bosses, 
big and little, did there begin to be a general awakening of 
the people to the existence of a system wholly mercenary, 
reared upon the greed for special privilege and the sale of 
such privilege by the skilled manipulations of the political party- 
organizations. 

The issue has now been fairly made up between Special Priv- 
ilege and Democracy, between government by purchase and 
government by the people. The contest will be a long one. It 
has already taken many forms and will assume countless more. 
Its crucial battles will be in the city, for there the struggle be- 
tween privilege and the common good is most constant and most 
intense. It is in the city that the victory of the one side or the 
other will be most far reaching in its consequences, for nothing 
is more certain than that the overwhelming majority of the 
inhabitants of the United States will be city-dwellers. This is 
already true of the Eastern states. The triumph of privilege in 
the city will mean, therefore, that the vast majority of the Ameri- 
can people have been made the subjects of government by pur- 
chase. And it will mean much more. The increasing domina- 
tion in state after state of the city "machines" over the state 
organization of political parties foreshadows the outcome in 
state and in nation. 

If the fight of the people to put down government by purchase 



334 Readings on Parties and Elections 

masquerading in the forms of democracy can be won in the city 
and a government accountable to the people set up in its stead, 
democracy will triumph in state and nation. If the people lose 
their fight in the city, they will lose it in state and nation. The 
city is the battle-ground of democracy. 



X. Direct Legislation and the Recall 

I. THE INITIATIVE AND REFERENDUM 1 

Direct legislation has received its widest use in America in 
Oregon. The provisions of the state constitution quoted 
here show the framework adopted there for this new method of 
popular control. 

Section i. The legislative authority of the state shall be 
vested in a legislative assembly, consisting of a senate and house 
of representatives, but the people reserve to themselves power to 
propose laws and amendments to the constitution and to enact 
or to reject the same at the polls, independent of the legislative 
assembly, and also reserve power at their own option to approve 
or reject at the polls any act of the legislative assembly. The 
first power reserved by the people is the initiative, and not more 
than eight per cent, of the legal voters shall be required to pro- 
pose any measure by such petition, and every such petition shall 
include the full test of the measure so proposed. Initiative peti- 
tions shall be filed with the secretary of state not less than four 
months before the election at which they are to be voted upon. 
The second power is the referendum, and it may be ordered 
(except as to laws necessary for the immediate preservation of 
the public peace, health or safety), either by the petition signed 
by five per cent, of the legal voters, or by the legislative assembly, 
as other bills are enacted. Referendum petitions shall be filed 
with the secretary of state not more than ninety days after the 
final adjournment of the session of the legislative assembly which 
passed the bill on which the referendum is demanded. The veto 
power of the governor shall not extend to measures referred to 

1 Constitution of Oregon, Articles IV and XVII. 
335 



336 Readings on Parties and Elections 

the people. All elections on measures referred to the people 
shall be had at the biennial regular general election, except when 
the legislative assembly shall order a special election. Any 
measure referred to the people shall take effect and become the 
law when it is approved by a majority of the votes cast thereon, 
and not otherwise. The style of all bills shall be : "Be it enacted 
by the people of the State of Oregon." This section shall 
not be construed to deprive any member of the legislative as- 
sembly of the right to introduce any measure. The whole num- 
ber of votes cast for justice of the supreme court at the regular 
election last preceding the filing of any petition for the initiative 
or for the referendum shall be the basis on which the number of 
legal voters necessary to sign such petition shall be counted. 
Petitions and orders for the initiative and referendum shall be 
filed with the secretary of state, and in submitting the same to 
the people he, and all other officers, shall be guided by the general 
laws and the act submitting this amendment, until legislation 
shall be especially provided therefor. 

Sec. 1a. The referendum may be demanded by the people 
against one or more items, sections or parts of any act of the legis- 
lative assembly, in the same manner in which such power may be 
exercised against a complete act. The filing of a referendum 
petition against one or more items, sections or parts of an act 
shall not delay the remainder of that act from becoming opera- 
tive. The initiative and referendum powers reserved to the 
people by this constitution are hereby further reserved to all lo- 
cal, special and municipal legislation of every character, in and 
for their respective municipalities and districts. The manner 
of exercising said powers shall be prescribed by general laws, 
except that cities and towns may provide for the manner of exer- 
cising the initiative and referendum powers as to their municipal 
legislation. Not more than ten per cent, of the legal voters may 
be required to order the referendum nor more than fifteen per 
cent, to propose any measure by the initiative in any city or 
town. . . 



Direct Legislation and the Recall 337 

Section I. Any amendment or amendments to this con- 
stitution may be proposed in either branch of the legislative 
assembly, and if the same shall be agreed to by a majority of all 
the members elected to each of the two houses, such proposed 
amendment or amendments shall, with the yeas and nays there- 
on, be entered in their journals and referred by the secretary of 
state to the people for their approval or rejection, at the next 
regular general election, except when the legislative assembly 
shall order a special election for that purpose. If a majority of 
the electors voting on any such amendment shall vote in favor 
thereof, it shall thereby become a part of this constitution. The 
votes for and against such amendment or amendments, severally, 
whether proposed by the legislative assembly or by initiative 
petition, shall be canvassed by the secretary of state in the pres- 
ence of the governor, and if it shall appear to the governor that 
the majority of the votes cast at said election on said amendment 
or amendments, severally, are cast in favor thereof, it shall be 
his duty forthwith after such canvass, by his proclamation, to 
declare the said amendment or amendments, severally, having 
received said majority of votes, to have been adopted by the peo- 
ple of Oregon as a part of the constitution thereof, and the same 
shall be in effect as a part of the constitution from the date of 
such proclamation. When two or more amendments shall be 
submitted in the manner aforesaid to the voters of this state, at 
the same election, they shall be so submitted that each amend- 
ment shall be voted on separately. No convention shall be 
called to amend or propose amendments to this constitution, 
or to propose a new constitution, unless the law providing for 
such convention shall first be approved by the people on a refer- 
endum vote at a regular general election. This article shall not 
be construed to impair the right of the people to amend this con- 
stitution by vote upon an initiative petition therefor. 



33% Readings on Parties and Elections 

2. THE WEAKNESS OF DIRECT LEGISLATION * 

Direct legislation, it is feared by many, is bound to be crude 
because of the lack of opportunity for a sifting of opinion and a 
recasting of the form the law is to take. Doubts are raised also 
as to whether it will remove the apathy of "stay at home" citi- 
zens. Instead of making easier the work of the already heavily 
burdened voter it increases his duties. 

In order that the referendum may operate as an efficient check 
upon bad laws it must be intelligently directed. Those laws 
which need to be held up must be discovered before the end of 
the ninety days within which it is usually provided that the 
petition must be filed, and the requisite petition must be se- 
cured and filed within this period. If the referendum is to oper- 
ate effectively in this regard, there must be a careful examination 
of the laws by persons who are interested in legislative matters 
and who are willing to scrutinize the acts of the legislature and 
to devote themselves to the task of securing the necessary peti- 
tions. In all probability only a portion of the bad laws will be 
discovered to be bad within the time limit. Unless the present 
means for the publication of our state laws are greatly improved, 
the public generally will be ignorant of the provisions of a large 
majority of the laws for a considerable period after their passage. 
It may be expected, therefore, that only those laws in which 
there is a very general interest, or which so affect the interests 
of particular individuals that they will make it their business to 
see that the petition is secured, will be subjected to the popu- 
lar vote. 

One very real danger must be noted. This is that the refer- 
endum may be used not only against laws which have been se- 
cured by an active and well-organized minority, and which sub- 
serve special or class interests, but also to suspend, until the 
next general election, laws which are really desired by the people. 

1 Sanborn, J. B., " Popular Legislation in the United States." Politi- 
cal Science Quarterly, Vol. 23, p. 587 et seq., Dec, 1908. 



t 



Direct Legislation and the Recall 339 

In order that the referendum may have any effectiveness the 
percentage of voters necessary to secure the popular vote cannot 
be very large. It must be a number which can be secured with- 
out any real difficulty within the limited time. This requirement 
makes it possible for special interests which are adversely affected 
by legislation to prevent its taking effect for a considerable 
period. That this objection is not fanciful may be seen in the 
experience of South Dakota last year. In that state petitions 
have been filed for popular vote upon three laws passed by the 
legislature of 1907. These laws are: An act extending to one 
year the period of residence necessary for securing a divorce, 
an act prohibiting the shooting of quail until 191 2, and an act 
prohibiting theatrical exhibitions, circuses, etc., upon Sunday. 

After the referendum petition has been filed, there is still the 
question of the efficiency of the popular vote. If the bad laws 
do not, on the whole, slip through unobserved and unchecked 
by petition, and if the plan be not used to suspend good laws, it 
is still necessary that it shall secure an expression of the best 
public sentiment. 

Such data as we have show that the referendum vote will be 
comparatively small. The ordinary experience with these popu- 
lar votes, either upon laws or upon constitutional provisions, in- 
dicates that the vote cast on such questions is usually much 
smaller than that cast at the same time for candidates for public 
offices. In an article by Philip L. Allen, in the Boston Evening 
Transcript of May 23, 1906, figures were given showing the popu- 
lar vote upon various laws or constitutional amendments. In 
the instances there cited, seventeen in number, the percentage 
of this vote to the simultaneous vote for public officers varied 
from seventy-eight to nineteen. In eight instances the vote 
was less than fifty per cent ; in only six instances did it exceed 
sixty per cent. . . 

Observation shows that in the long run only about one-half 
of the voters who go to the polls will take the trouble to vote 
upon laws submitted to them. 



34-0 Readings on Parties and Elections 

These comparisons are made with the number who vote for 
public officers. If a comparison be made with the total number 
of the legal voters of the state, the results are much more strik- 
ing. In an election which for some reason calls out a large vote, 
as in a presidential year, the total vote cast may run up to about 
eighty per cent of the voters. In Wisconsin, for instance, in 
1904, the vote for governor was seventy-eight and seven- tenths 
per cent of the voters. In a year in which the general interest 
is not so great, as for instance in a so-called "off" year, the vote 
is regularly much smaller. In Wisconsin, in 1906, the vote for 
governor was fifty-six per cent of the voters. If only sixty to 
eighty per cent of the voters come to the polls, and if only about 
one-half of these vote upon referendum matters, even a unani- 
mous vote in favor of a measure means its adoption by a minor- 
ity of the legal voters of the state. 

Statistical studies as to the relative intelligence of the voters 
and non-voters upon referendum measures are unfortunately 
lacking. . . 

There seems to be little reason to expect that the better ele- 
ment will vote any more strongly at a referendum than at a regu- 
lar election. The "stay-at-home" vote would be the same in 
both cases. There is no indication that a referendum election 
tends to bring to the polls those who do not care to vote for the 
candidates for public offices. The citizen who does not care to 
go to the polls and vote for governor would probably not be at- 
tracted thither by a chance to vote against a proposed law. If 
our present political agitation does not stimulate him to activity, 
there is little hope that additional demands upon his time would 
move him. It may also be questioned whether those who now 
neglect their political duties would be a desirable addition to a 
body of citizens voting upon a proposed law. 

Taking those who do their duty in this respect, who regularly 
vote at the polls, may we assume that the portion of these elec- 
tors which votes for or against pending laws represents the more 
intelligent or better element? It is commonly considered that 



Direct Legislation and the Recall 341 

much of the trouble encountered in the working of our present 
political system is due to the fact that those who ought to know 
better ignore their political duties. The more intelligent citi- 
zen, when he votes at all, is unfortunately too apt to confine his 
voting to the election of officers and not infrequently he indicates 
his choice for only a portion of the offices to be filled. He does 
not come out to the primaries or to the caucuses. Can we then 
expect that the better element will constitute, or preponderate 
in, the body which votes upon pending bills ? 

What of the other sort of voter, the man who votes at least as 
often as the law allows, who does as he is told and who furnishes 
the strength of the machine ? Voting on a few laws would offer 
no terror to him. He could quickly learn where to make the 
additional marks upon the ballot, and he would remember what 
was expected of him. There would therefore seem to be little 
hope that the vote on a law would express any higher public 
opinion than the vote for the members of the legislature. . . 

If we admit, as I think we must, that the proper goal of legis- 
lation is a better and more intelligent consideration of pending 
measures, we must acknowledge that the referendum brings us 
no nearer that goal. In fact, it probably takes us in the other 
direction. The consideration which the vast majority of voters 
can give to a measure submitted to them is necessarily hasty and 
superficial. A careful examination of even a few laws, in the 
manner which I have indicated as necessary for a proper appre- 
ciation of the effect of one's vote, is impossible to practically 
every person outside of the legislature. The ordinary voter 
has little or no time to give to the examination of bills which 
may be presented to him. If he has the time, he seldom has the 
facilities for obtaining the information that is needed if he is to 
vote in a proper manner. Comparatively few voters possess 
the information which is necessary for an intelligent judgment 
regarding the numerous candidates and issues of our various 
elections. Until the voters meet these existing obligations im- 
posed by our political system, obligations which cannot be done 



34 2 Readings on Parties and Elections 

away with by any system of initiative or referendum, we should 
hesitate to place new burdens upon them. 

The referendum tends to place the emphasis at the wrong end 
of the legislative work. If we elect good men to the legislatures 
the needs of checks of this kind will largely pass away. The agi- 
tation for the referendum has been to a considerable extent due 
to the failure of the voter properly to perform his duties as an 
elector. However numerous and complex the causes of this 
failure may be, one cause which has been very potent is the public 
indifference to caucuses and elections. If this public indifference 
continues, we cannot expect that the referendum will be success- 
ful. With this indifference removed, the need for the referendum 
will no longer be so apparent. 

An interest in referendum measures can never be a substi- 
tute for an interest in elections. The referendum is exceptional. 
It can never be expected to operate upon more than a few of the 
many laws enacted. The bulk of our legislation must continue 
to proceed from our legislatures, unchecked by the referendum. 
The referendum is then a method of legislation which can affect 
only a small fraction of the laws, and it depends for its efficiency 
upon conditions which, if realized, would make its employment 
largely if not entirely unnecessary. 

Against the initiative, as far as its referendum feature is con- 
cerned, the same objections may be made as against the refer- 
endum when used alone. The popular vote upon a bill proposed 
by the initiative would be no better and no worse than on a bill 
passed by the legislature. The initiative would, however, add 
to the number of bills to be voted on and would thus decrease 
the attention which the voters could give to each one. 

What sort of bills may we expect to see proposed under the 
initiative ? It is not especially important to determine whether 
they will be conservative or radical. If the system is worthy of 
adoption, undesirable bills will be eliminated by the referendum. 
The question is as to the form of the bills. Is it to be expected 
that they will be so worded as to accomplish the desired ends ? 



Direct Legislation and the Recall 343 

Practically every bill which comes before an American legis- 
lature is originally introduced in such form that its passage would 
be extremely unfortunate. It is probably not too much to say 
that nearly all bills are, in their original form, crude and un- 
workable. These bills — and the same would be true of those 
proposed by initiative petition — are the product of one man or 
of a small group of men. Even when based on a careful and con- 
scientious study of the subject, they have the shortcomings in- 
evitable from the limitations surrounding their origin. Before 
they can even approximate perfection, they need the public dis- 
cussion, the criticism of opposing interests, the suggestions of 
foes as well as of friends. The process of amendment and re- 
amendment, which is possible only in a legislature, is necessary 
to the normal growth of a bill into a law. 

Every subject of importance is apt to be covered by several 
bills. None of these is perfect; each probably has something 
of merit. In the legislature, these bills can be considered to- 
gether ; the good portions of each can be accepted and the bad 
rejected. No such procedure can be followed in the case of ini- 
tiative measures. If several similar bills are proposed by peti- 
tion, they cannot be amended and combined. One must be se- 
lected and the others rejected, unless, as is entirely possible, more 
than one act dealing with the same subject is adopted by the 
popular vote. 

The failure of the referendum to afford opportunity for ade- 
quate discussion has already been noted. This defect will be 
felt much more keenly in the case of bills proposed by initiative 
petition than in the case of bills which pass the legislature in the 
regular way before they are submitted to the referendum. In 
the latter case, discussion in the legislature enables that body to 
bring the bill into something like proper shape. In the former 
case all the advantages of such discussion, all the suggestions to 
be derived from the arguments of interests adversely affected by 
the bill, all the amendments that might be made by parties in- 
terested in its passage, are lost. Intelligent legislation is not 



344 Readings on Parties and Elections 

promoted by a system which treats a bill, in the shape in which 
it is presented to a legislature, as a finality. 

An illustration of the difference between initiative and regular 
legislation is found in the " anti-pass" law of the state of Oregon. 
In 1906 a bill covering this subject was submitted by initiative 
petition and was adopted by a vote of 57,281 for. and 16,709 
against. This bill was so poorly worded that, upon a literal 
reading, it forbade a railroad from issuing passes to its own em- 
ployees but allowed it to issue them to the employees of other 
roads. Fortunately the act was not effective, because of the 
absence of an enacting clause. The legislature of 1907 passed 
a general railroad law in which the subject of passes was covered 
in a proper and intelligible manner. 

The failure of the initiative to afford opportunity for amend- 
ment is met to some extent in the system adopted in Maine and 
pending in North Dakota. In these states, the legislature may 
reject the initiative bill and propose a substitute. In such a 
case both bills are submitted to popular vote, and the voters are 
called upon to choose between them. This device enables the 
legislature to correct faults in the proposed legislation. The 
substitute will undoubtedly be far superior to the initiative bill. 
The existence of the two bills will, however, complicate greatly 
the work of the people. The voting upon a single bill is difficult 
enough; the choosing between competing bills will be much 
more difficult. 

The most that can be claimed for the initiative is that it 
forces the legislature to act. The laws resulting from this co- 
ercion will in most cases be crude and unscientific. From the 
point of view of the improvement of our legislation in the matter 
of form, they will mark a long step backward. . . 

One other and very fundamental objection may be made both 
to the referendum and to the initiative. They tend to weaken 
the sense of legislative responsibility. With the referendum the 
legislator does not vote for or against a bill, he votes to give the 
people an opportunity to vote on it. He does not need to ex- 



Direct Legislation and the Recall 345 

press his own opinion. He may say that his views are imma- 
terial, that even if he is opposed to a bill it would be unjust to re- 
fuse to allow the people a chance to express themselves. This 
feeling will affect his attitude towards all bills, irrespective of 
the question whether they are actually to be subjected to a refer- 
endum vote. Every bill may be thus subjected, and if no peti- 
tion is filed concerning a particular measure, the people may be 
considered to have ratified it. They have had the opportunity 
to act, and if they remain quiescent the responsibility for the 
bill rests with them, not with the legislature. 

The initiative would also shift responsibility. If new laws 
are needed, they may be submitted by the initiative petition. 
If the legislators do not propose the measures needed, they 
are not to be blamed. The failure of the people to use their 
initiative indicates that they do not desire action upon the 
matter. 

The diffusion of responsibility which would result from shift- 
ing the burden of legislative reform from the few to the many 
is in direct opposition to the teachings of political experience. 
The way to get good government is not to scatter the responsi- 
bility among a number, so that each can dodge the blame if the 
work goes ill or claim the credit if it goes well. The approved 
way is to make each responsible for his appointed task and to 
hold him rigidly to that responsibility. 

3. OBJECTIONS TO DIRECT LEGISLATION EXAMINED 1 

Advocates of direct legislation believe that the realization 
of his increased responsibility and influence in deciding the 
laws by which he will be governed will lead the average man 
to a greater interest in public affairs. 

Nor indeed are the evils which it is prophesied will come 
with direct legislation attributable to it, for they exist under 
our present party system and would, it is insisted, not be increased 
by the adoption of direct legislation. 

1 Lobingier, C. S., Arena, Vol. XXXIV, pp. 234-240, 1905. 



346 Readings on Parties and Elections 

The attitude of expert and professional opinion has not, as 
a whole, been favorable to the extension of the Swiss referendum. 
. . An examination of the literature of the subject will dis- 
close that the chief objections urged by these opponents of the 
referendum may be reduced to four, viz. : (1) Indifference of 
electors; (2) complexity of legislation and incapacity of elec- 
tors ; (3) obliteration of distinction between constitutional and 
other law, and (4) impairment of legislative influence. 

Of these the first is the one most frequently and insistently 
urged. . . So M. Deploige, a Belgian critic, who is none too 
friendly, declares of the referendum : "It is a little ridiculous to 
talk of legislation by the people when more than one-half the 
citizens refuse to exercise their legislative rights. " 

But it seems not to have occurred to the opponents of direct- 
legislation that this line of argument would tell quite as strongly 
against a cherished American practice — the submission of con- 
stitutions to a popular vote. Judge Simeon E. Baldwin, speak- 
ing of a state where submission has been followed from the first, 
says : "Experience shows that much less interest is taken by the 
people in propositions for constitutional amendments than in 
elections to office. The personal element is always wanting, 
and, generally, that of party advantage." , . 

Now the benefits of popular ratification form a subject on 
which there is a practical unanimity of opinion among the 
publicists of the present day. Professor Hart himself observes : 
" In the United States we have already the good effects of the 
referendum, so far as it deals with changes of the constitutions, 
the permanent and superior part of our law." 

Among these "good effects" are, it is generally conceded, the 
permanence of constitutions and the educational influence upon 
the electors — all this in spite of the fact that a large percentage 
apparently fails to exercise the privilege. It is difficult to under- 
stand why similar advantages might not accrue by applying the 
system to ordinary legislation. 

Moreover, in some parts of the country, at least, the voters 



Direct Legislation and the Recall 



347 



display a growing appreciation of their function as constitution- 
makers. Thus in California, during a period of a dozen years, 
in which some twenty-eight amendments were submitted, an 
average of about two-thirds of those voting at the election availed 
themselves of their right to pass upon these proposed changes in 
the fundamental law. On the question of extending the fran- 
chise to women, which was submitted at a presidential election, 
83.4 per cent of those voting for presidential candidates regis- 
tered their choice, while the lowest constitutional vote during 
the period was 39.4 per cent, which was cast on an amendment 
to which there was little opposition. In Texas and other states 
of the South and West, the figures reveal on the part of the elec- 
torate an increasing interest in constitution-making. . . 

A light vote on constitutional amendments may also frequently 
be explained by the comparative unimportance of some, or, on 
the other hand, by the strong probability of their adoption on 
account of their general acceptance, or for some other reason. 

But conceding that the electors do fail to take as much interest 
in abstract questions in the form of proposed constitutions and 
laws as in the election of candidates, does it follow that the sys- 
tem of direct popular action is a failure or that the state's in- 
terests would be promoted by discarding it ? 

"The lack of an absolutely full vote on any question," says 
Mr. Moffett, . . . "is not a disadvantage but the reverse. It 
means that only those who feel some interest in the subject, and 
are therefore prepared to act with a certain intelligence, take the 
trouble to vote, and that the members of the unintelligent 
residuum voluntarily disfranchise themselves." 

It may be, and apparently is, true that more electors will go 
to the polls to vote for certain individuals for office than will 
exercise the higher privilege of determining the character of the 
state's laws. In other words, a personal and concrete subject 
arouses greater interest than an impersonal and abstract one. But 
it surely will not be claimed that those who vote simply for candi- 
dates and fail to vote on proposed laws are actuated by patriotic 



348 Readings on Parties and Elections 

or even intelligent motives. We have seen that the framers of the 
first popularly-adopted American state constitution sought to 
make ours "a government of laws, not of men " ; the voter who 
goes to the polls because, and merely because, he wishes one or 
more individuals elected to office and who ignores the oppor- 
tunity to express his choice concerning the laws, must be deemed 
to be more interested in the fortunes of individuals than in the 
welfare of the state and to have failed to attain a high standard 
of good citizenship. 

M. Simon Deploige, in his objections to the referendum, de- 
clares : — 

"The elector who writes Aye or No on his ballot-paper per- 
forms an act, the apparent simplicity of which has attracted the 
democrats, but this act is, as a matter of fact, a very complex 
one. It requires that each voter should be able not only to un- 
derstand why legislation is necessary, but also should be able to 
judge whether the law in question is adequate to meet the case. 
Nothing effectual has as yet been devised which would assist the 
elector in forming a personal opinion on such a subject." 

But it may well be asked if this is not after all an indictment 
of popular government in general rather than merely of popular 
legislation, and whether as a matter of fact the people are not 
now, in the last analysis, required to determine these questions 
but to do so under a system which disguises and conceals the 
fact that they are involved ? When the American electorate is 
called upon to choose a president or a congress, or when the Brit- 
ish voter is asked to register his choice for members of parlia- 
ment, the result usually determines the fate of important meas- 
ures vitally affecting the national policy. But these are not 
the questions most discussed in the campaign before the people. 
Instead of simplifying the voter's task the present system too 
often complicates it by involving the merits of a question with 
others, like the personality of candidates, or the necessity of 
party success. . . 

Mr. A. Lawrence Lowell, in an elaborate article, says : — 



-Direct Legislation and the Recall 349 

"Our whole political system rests on the distinction between 
constitutional and other laws. The former are the solemn prin- 
ciples laid down by the people in its ultimate sovereignty; the 
latter are regulations made by its representatives within the 
limits of their authority, and the courts can hold unauthorized 
and void any act which exceeds those limits. The courts can 
do this because they are maintaining against the legislature the 
fundamental principles which the people themselves have deter- 
mined to support, and they can do it only so long as the people 
feel that the constitution is something more sacred and endur- 
ing than ordinary laws, something that derives its force from 
a higher authority. Now, if all laws received their sanction 
from a direct popular vote, this distinction would disappear. 
There would cease to be any reason for considering one law more 
sacred than another, and hence our courts would soon lose their 
power to pass upon the constitutionality of statutes." 

But the referendum is not a system under which "all laws re- 
ceive their sanction from a direct popular vote." Its adoption 
means not the abolition of the legislature but primarily the 
maintenance of a wholesome check thereon, and at most the pro- 
viding of an alternative system. In Switzerland the bulk of 
legislation is still enacted by the representative body. 

Moreover, there are those who would not consider it a serious 
calamity if our courts should lose some of "their power to pass 
upon the constitutionality of statutes." In this day when im- 
portant and beneficial statutes are often annulled on purely tech- 
nical grounds, — when inferior courts and even ministerial offi- 
cers assume to pass upon the constitutionality of laws, — the 
adoption of a system which would necessarily check this tend- 
ency could hardly be regarded as an unmixed evil. 

Finally it should not be overlooked that this objection is not 
peculiar to the referendum, but that it could be made and has 
been made in reference to popular constitution-making. Wood- 
row Wilson declares that in our recent fundamental codes "the 
distinctions between constitutional and ordinary law hitherto 



350 Readings on Parties and Elections 

recognized and valued, tend to be fatally obscured," and it is 
common to deplore the tendency of the framers of these instru- 
ments to encroach on the field of general legislation. But 
whether or not this tendency is as dangerous as is claimed, it 
seems unlikely to be prevented by keeping out the referendum. 

Professor Dicey, speaking with reference to the British legis- 
lature, says : — 

" The referendum diminishes the importance of parliamentary 
debate and thereby detracts from the influence of parliament. 
That this must be so admits of no denial ; a veto, whether it be 
exercised by a king or by an electorate, lessens the power of the 
legislature." 

Mr. Bryce expresses the same thought when he says that 
direct popular legislation "tends to lower the authority and 
sense of responsibility in the legislature." 

But the loss of legislative influence is already an accomplished 
fact. 

"The American people," declares Professor Commons, "are 
fairly content with their executive and judicial departments of 
government, but they feel that their law-making bodies have 
painfully failed. This conviction pertains to all grades of legis- 
latures, municipal, state and federal. The newspapers speak 
what the people feel ; and judging therefrom it is popular to de- 
nounce aldermen, legislators and congressmen. When congress 
is in session, the business interests are reported to be in agony 
until it adjourns. The cry that rises towards the end of a 
legislature's session is humiliating. . . This demoralization of 
legislative bodies, these tendencies to restrict legislation, must 
be viewed as a profoundly alarming feature of American poli- 
tics." . . 

Indeed, instead of impairing the prestige of legislatures the 
referendum seems to offer the one means of saving what little 
of it still remains. Probably the one fact which has contributed 
more than any other to lower the tone and standing of legisla- 
tive bodies is the presence and influence of the lobby. If im- 



Direct Legislation and the Recall 351 

portant measures were subject to a reference to the people be- 
fore attaining the finality of legislation the power and influence 
of the lobby would be greatly reduced, if not destroyed. Such, 
at least, has been the experience of South Dakota as declared by 
its chief executive. 

These, then, are the results of a somewhat extensive search 
for the opinions of those who are supposed to speak with au- 
thority in opposition to the referendum. The arguments ad- 
vanced and the reasons given seem far from convicting. This is 
not saying that there are no sound objections to the referendum. 
But if that system is to be condemned by the masters of political 
science it would seem that they must do so upon other grounds 
than those commonly urged. 

4. THE RECALL IN OREGON 1 

The recall is the latest expedient to secure popular control 
over the government. Like direct legislation, it is as yet in 
its experimental stage in America. As in direct legislation the 
provisions adopted by Oregon for the recall are typical of the 
more advanced political thought. 

The final step in the establishment of popular government in 
Oregon was the adoption of the recall amendment to the Con- 
stitution, which was adopted in 1908 by a vote of 58,381 to 31- 
002. Under this amendment any public officer may be recalled 
by the filing of a petition signed by twenty-five per cent of the 
number of electors who voted in his district in the preceding 
election. The petition must set forth the reasons for the recall, 
and if the officer does not resign within five days after the peti- 
tion is filed a special election must be ordered to be held within 
twenty days to determine whether the people will recall such 
officer. On the ballot at such election the reasons for demanding 
the recall of said officer may be set forth in not more than 200 

1 Bourne, Jr., J., " Popular Government in Oregon." Outlook, Oct. 8, 1910 ; 
Vol. 96, No. 6, p. 329. 



351 Readings on Parties and Elections 

words. His justification of his course in office may be set forth 
in a like number of words. He retains his office until the results 
of the special election have been officially declared. No petition 
can be circulated against any oificer until he has held office six 
months, except that in the case of a member of the State Legis- 
lature it may be filed at any time after five days from the begin- 
ning of the first session after his election. At the special election 
the candidate receiving the highest number of votes is declared 
elected. The special election is held at public expense, but a 
second recall petition cannot be filed against an officer unless 
the petitioners first pay the entire expense of the first recall 
election. 

5. THE RECALL IN ARIZONA 1 

Arizona in the constitution of 19 10 has applied the recall 
to a wider range of officers than any other state. The recall 
applied to the judiciary has been especially the subject of criti- 
cism because it is feared such a provision will make the courts 
bend their decisions to conform to passing popular opinion. 

1. Recall of Public Officers 

Sec. 1. Every public officer in the State of Arizona, holding 
an elective office, either by election or appointment, is subject 
to recall from such office by the qualified electors of the elec- 
toral district from which candidates are elected to such office. 
Such electoral district may include the whole State. Such num- 
ber of said electors as shall equal twenty-five per centum of the 
number of votes cast at the last preceding general election for all 
of the candidates for the office held by such officer, may by peti- 
tion, which shall be known as a Recall Petition, demand his 
recall. 

1 Constitution of Arizona, Art. VIII, 1910. By the enabling act passed 
in 191 1 Arizona was required to modify this article so that the recall 
should not apply to judges. 



Direct Legislation and the Recall 2 S3 

Sec. 2. Every Recall Petition must contain a general state- 
ment, in not more than two hundred words, of the grounds of 
such demand, and must be filed in the office in which petitions 
for nominations to the office held by the incumbent are required 
to be filed. The signatures to such Recall Petition need not all 
be on one sheet of paper, but each signer must add to his signa- 
ture the date of his signing said petition, and his place of resi- 
dence, giving his street and number, if any, should he reside in a 
town or city. One of the signers of each sheet of such petition, 
or the person circulating such sheet, must make and subscribe 
an oath on said sheet, that the signatures thereon are genuine. 

Sec. 3. If said officer shall offer his resignation it shall be ac- 
cepted, and the vacancy shall be filled as maybe provided by law. 
If he shall not resign within five days after a Recall Petition is 
filed, a special election shall be ordered to be held, not less than 
twenty, nor more than thirty days after such order, to determine 
whether such officer shall be recalled. On the ballots at said 
election shall be printed the reasons as set forth in the petition 
for demanding his recall, and, in not more than two hundred 
words, the officer's justification of his course in office. He shall 
continue to perform the duties of his office until the result of said 
election shall have been officially declared. 

Sec. 4. Unless he otherwise request, in writing, his name shall 
be placed as a candidate on the official ballot without nomina- 
tion. Other candidates for the office may be nominated to be 
voted for at said election. The candidate who shall receive the 
highest number of votes, shall be declared elected for the re- 
mainder of the term. Unless the incumbent receive the highest 
number of votes, he shall be deemed to be removed from office, 
upon qualification of his successor. In the event that his suc- 
cessor shall not qualify within five days after the result of said 
election shall have been declared, the said office shall be vacant, 
and may be filled as provided by law. 

Sec. 5. No Recall Petition shall be circulated against any 
officer until he shall have held his office for a period of six months, 

2A 



354 Readings on Parties and Elections 

except that it may be filed against a member of the Legislature 
at any time after five days from the beginning of the first session 
after his election. After one Recall Petition and election, no 
further Recall Petition shall be filed against the same officer dur- 
ing the term for which he was elected, unless petitioners signing 
such petition shall first pay into the public treasury which has 
paid such election expenses, all expenses of the preceding election. 
Sec. 6. The general election laws shall apply to recall elections 
in so far as applicable. Laws necessary to facilitate the opera- 
tion of the provisions of this article shall be enacted, including 
provision for payment by the public treasury of the reasonable 
special election campaign expenses of such officer. 



' I V HE following pages contain advertisements of a 
few Macmillan books on kindred subjects 



By M. OSTROGORSKI 

Democracy and the Party System in the 
United States 

A Study in Extra-constitutional Government 

Cloth, 478 pp., index, i2mo, $1.75 net; by mail, $1.88 

" Students of government, the world over, will turn to this book for exact 
information and critical discussion of its most vital problem." — The Dial, 
Chicago. 

" It would be an astonishing book had it been written by an Englishman 
or an American who had spent a lifetime in the study and practice of politics. 
Coming as it does from the pen of a foreign student, it is simply an amazing 
embodiment of minute observation and extraordinary knowledge." — Man- 
chester Guardian. 

" It should stand beside Mr. Bryce's great work, as a book which will 
avail as much for instruction and correction in righteousness. The gratitude 
of democracy to its accomplished author should be great; republics in the 
end are not ungrateful." — The Literary World, Boston. 

"The work of M. Ostrogorski, great in every respect, continues and com- 
pletes the work of Tocqueville, Sumner, Maine, Lecky, and Bryce." — DAnnee 
Sociologique, Paris. 

"This is a work, a great work, which claims the attention of the politician 
and of the citizen, speaks of his rights, as well as of the philosopher and the 
historian. It makes an epoch in the history of political thought as did, in 
their time, the ' Esprit des lois ' by Montesquieu, and ' Democracy in America,' 
by Tocqueville." — Le Temps, Paris. 

"This is a great work such as has not yet even been published." — Revue 
du droit public, Paris. 

" It is one of the most notable books which has been written about the 
workings of democratic institutions. It goes beyond the forms, and ... it 
gets at the reality of things." — New York Tribune. 

"The author's style is such that it is no hardship to follow him from be- 
ginning to end of his discussion." — New York Times. 

" The remarkable work by Mr. Ostrogorski ... is undoubtedly one of the 
most notable books in political science that has appeared in many years. . . . 
The author merits great praise for his industry in gathering facts and his skill in 
making so long and elaborate a work so readable." — Springfield Republican. 



PUBLISHED BY 

THE MACMILLAN COMPANY 

64-66 Fifth Avenue, New York 



The American Federal State 

A Text-Book in Civics for High Schools and Colleges 

By ROSCOE LEWIS ASHLEY 



New edition, illustrated, cloth, i2tno, $2.00 net 



The important changes in this new edition are chiefly in Part III on 
Policies and Problems, while Part I on Historical Development and Part II 
on Government are substantially the same as in the old edition. In Part II, 
however, the chapters on Executive Departments and Some Phases of State 
Activity have been rewritten, so as to include developments of the last 
iecade. In Part HI a new chapter has been added on Natural Resources, 
while the chapter on Commerce, Industry, and Labor is practically new, 
because of increased regulation of industry and railroads, and new phases of 
labor protection. A large number of new references has been added through- 
out the book. 

If every American youth were led through a conscientious study of 
American civics as set forth in this book, there would be no more ignorant 
voting, no more unintelligent support of party politicians, no more " railroad 
legislation" because of ignorant party followers; every citizen of the coming 
generation would know, definitely and clearly, the how and the why of every 
phase of governmental machinery. 

Although this book contains more material and outlines a more com- 
plete study of civics than most text -books on the subject, the author has 
arranged a plan by which more cursory study may be made, using only 
parts of the book. High school and even grammar school teachers will 
find this plan of unusual merit. 



PUBLISHED BY 

THE MACMILLAN COMPANY 

64-66 Fifth Avenue, New York 



By CHARLES A. BEARD 

Professor of History in Columbia University, author of 
" Introduction to the English Historians." 

Readings in American Government and Politics 

A collection of interesting material illustrative of the different periods 
in the history of the United States, prepared for those students 
who desire to study source writings. 

Cloth, crown 8vo. Now Ready, $i.qo net 

" An invaluable guide for the student of politics, setting forth in an 
illuminating way the many phases of our political life." — Critic. 

American Government and Politics 

Cloth, 776 pages, i2mo, index, $2.10 net 

A work designed primarily for college students, but of considerable in- 
terest to the general reader. A special feature is the full attention paid to 
topics that have been forced into public attention by the political conditions 
of the present time. 



By WILLIAM ARCHIBALD DUNNING, Ph.D. 

Professor of History in Columbia University 

A History of Political Theories 

2 Volumes 

I — Ancient and Medieval 
II — From Luther to Montesquieu 

Cloth, 8vo, each $2.50 net 

The' successive transformations through which the political consciousness 
of men has passed from early antiquity to modern times are stated in a clear, 
intelligible manner, and to aid in a fuller study of the subject references are 
appended to each chapter covering the topics treated therein. At the end of 
each volume has been placed an alphabetical list containing full information 
as to all the works referred to, together with many additional titles. 



PUBLISHED BY 

THE MACMILLAN COMPANY 

64-66 Fifth Avenue, New York 



A GREAT WORK INCREASED IN VALUE 



The American Commonwealth 

By JAMES BRYCE 



New edition, thoroughly revised, with four new chapters 
Two 8vo volumes $4.00 net 



" More emphatically than ever is it the most noteworthy treatise on our 
political and social system." — The Dial. 

"The most sane and illuminating book that has been written on this 
country." — Chicago Tribune. 

" What makes it extremely interesting is that it gives the matured views 
of Mr. Bryce after a closer study of American institutions for nearly the life 
of a generation." — San Francisco Chronicle. 

"The work is practically new and more indispensable than ever." — 
Boston Herald. 

" In its revised form, Mr. Bryce's noble and discerning book deserves 
to hold its preeminent place for at least twenty years more." — Record- 
Herald, Chicago, 111. 



The American Commonwealth 

Abridged Edition, for the use of Colleges and High Schools. Being 
an Introduction to the Study of the Government and Institutions 
of the United States. By James Bryce. 

One volume. Crown 8vo, xiii + 547 pages, $1.75 net 

"It is a genuine pleasure to commend to our readers the abridged 
edition of 'The American Commonwealth' just issued by the Macmillan 
Company. Mr. Bryce's book, which has heretofore been issued only in two 
volumes, has no peer as a commentary upon American political institutions." — 
Public Opinion. 



PUBLISHED BY 

THE MACMILLAN COMPANY 

64-66 Fifth Avenue, New York 



The Government of England 



By A. LAWRENCE LOWELL, LL.D. 

President of Harvard University 
Two volumes, cloth, gilt tops, 8vo. Fourth edition, revised, iqoq. $4.00 net 

EXTRACTS FROM A FEW OF THE NUMEROUS PRESS 
COMMENTS 

". . . A masterpiece of literary and political writing. ... A notable 
contribution to higher American scholarship." — Philadelphia Evening 
Telegraph. 

"... The greatest work in this field that has ever been produced by an 
American scholar." — Pittsburgh Post. 

"A work that may almost be termed epochal. . . . An achievement of 
greater importance to the student of economics and to the publicist has not 
been completed within the decade." — The Interior, Chicago. 

"A message of good will from one nation to another ... an admirable 
work ... an embassy of peace." — Chicago Evening Post. 

"An intensely interesting work for Americans, not only because it sets forth 
a fine instance of political evolution in an illuminating way, but also because 
it shows us the great roots out of which our own institutions sprang. Readers 
of Mr. Bryce's ' American Commonwealth ' will be especially attracted by this 
work. The two books together constitute a political education." — Presby- 
terian Banner. 

" Scholarly in character, profound in treatment, clear in its presentation. . . . 
Because of its high standard of merit, there is little wonder that it has been 
welcomed by so many American readers." — Boston Globe. 

" It stands in distinguished isolation by reason of its comprehensive plan, the 
masterly way in which the plan has developed, and the sympathetic insight 
with which Mr. Lowell has described and analyzed the spirit in which Eng- 
lish people work their institutions." — American Historical Review. 

"The reader will acknowledge a debt of gratitude to the author of this really 
remarkable work, not only for its wealth of learning and boldness of reason- 
ing, but for its topical arrangement and the scholarly simplicity of its style." 
— Literary Digest. 

PUBLISHED BY 

THE MACMILLAN COMPANY 

64-66 Fifth Avenue, New York 



By WILLIAM MACDONALD 

Professor of History in Brown University 

Select Charters and Other Documents 

Illustrative of American History, 1606-1775 

Cloth i2tno $2.00 net 

" This volume . . . supplements the author's previous work, entitled ' Se- 
lect Documents Illustrative of the History of the United States, 1776-1861.' 
The same sound judgment has been shown in the selection and the editing of 
the state papers, and the work is essential to every good reference library." — 
The Outlook, 

"Professor MacDonald shows good judgment in his selections, and his 
book should materially assist the teaching of American history. ... It will 
be a great convenience everywhere." — The Nation. 

Select Documents 

Illustrative of the History of the United States, 1776-1861 

Cloth i2mo $2.25 net 

" It is a valuable book to students of American history, and, indeed, to all 
persons who care to discuss our present problems in their historical bearings. 
We can think of no public document, from the promulgation of the Declaration 
of Independence to the adoption of the Constitution of the Confederate States, 
to which frequent reference is made, which is not at least summarized in this 
volume. The summaries, furthermore, whether of judicial decisions, reports, 
treatises, messages, or resolutions, are admirably made. It is an invaluable 
book for every reference library." — The Outlook. 

Select Statutes and Other Documents 

Illustrative of the History of the United States, 1861-1898 

Cloth i2tno $2.00 net 

"The political and civil phases of the war; slavery and civil rights; recon- 
struction and the readmission of the states; legal tender, silver coinage, bank- 
ing, and finance; the amendments and acts relating thereto; naturalization, 
polygamy, and Chinese exclusion; the election of senators; the electoral count; 
the presidential succession; and recent phases of expansion — these subjects 
indicate the scope and importance of the topics selected. Certain notable 
presidential messages, like the Venezuelan message of President Cleveland in 
1893, are included. The valuable notes and references preceding each docu- 
ment are included in this volume as in the others. Professor MacDonald's 
final volume sustains the merit of a series whose usefulness and value have al- 
ready received wide recognition." — James A. Woodburn, in The American 
Historical Review. 

PUBLISHED BY 

THE MACMILLAN COMPANY 

64-66 Fifth Avenue, New York 



$h: 



y.iz 



One copy del. to Cat. Div. 



JAN Ji 



